引用本文:
【打印本页】   【下载PDF全文】   查看/发表评论  【EndNote】   【RefMan】   【BibTex】
←前一篇|后一篇→ 过刊浏览    高级检索
本文已被:浏览 72次   下载 368 本文二维码信息
码上扫一扫!
分享到: 微信 更多
社区韧性:发展演进及空间规划启示
杨选梅1, 刘 超2, 彭 翀3
1.同济大学建筑与城市规划学院,博士,高 级城乡规划师;2.( 通讯作者):同济大学建筑与城市规划 学院,自然资源部国土空间智能规划技 术重点实验室,助理教授,liuchao1020@ gmail.com;3.华中科技大学建筑与城市规划学院,湖北 省城镇化工程技术研究中心,教授
摘要:
嵌入韧性的空间规划成为应对复合型 灾害风险的规划方法,本文旨在解析社区韧性 发展演进特征并将集聚后的系统性知识应用于 空间规划。本文利用CiteSpace和Histcite定量分 析2 266篇国际文献表征社区韧性学科发展脉 络、集聚成十大研究热点和推演出四大研究前 沿:跨学科合作和多学科发展成为重要特征; 社会网络是社区韧性的核心特征,表现为研究 热期长、突变值高;本地特征是十大研究热点 的共同关注;除此之外,风险治理、时空演变和 评估模型也代表未来研究方向。在此基础上, 本文构建研究热点和研究前沿文献的施引文献 数据集,与空间规划文献产生内容关联,结果表 明:空间规划契合社区韧性的跨学科研究特征,社区韧性评估和社会网络分别为空间规划的关联基础和关键链接。据此,本文认为新一轮国土 空间规划促进社区韧性的三大未来研究议题为国土空间韧性定义的规范性、社会生态—技术协 同下的国土韧性评估方法和自下而上的社会网络治理。
关键词:  社区韧性  文献计量  城市规划;风险治理
DOI:10.13791/j.cnki.hsfwest.20240210
分类号:
基金项目:国家自然科学基金青年项目(52108060);上海市自 然科学基金项目(21ZP1466500);教育部产学合作 协同育人项目;住建部2021-2022科研课题(2021-k- 008)
Community resilience: Evolution and spatial planning response
Yang Xuanmei,Liu Chao,Peng Chong
Abstract:
Since the concept of community resilience was put forward in the 1980s, this term has been a focal point in various disciplines such as sociology, environmental science, and engineering. While these disciplines individually contribute to understanding social unit resilience, environmental features’ capacity to absorb shocks, and building infrastructure resilience. It may result in inconsistent concepts and definitions by combining them. The terms of spatial resilience, territorial resilience and territorial resilience planning emerged successively after 1990, 2010 and 2015. It can be seen that urban and spatial planning with resilience can be served as a method to address complex disaster risks. This paper aims to analyze the evolution of community resilience research and apply accumulated knowledge to urban and spatial planning. By utilizing Citespace and Histcite to quantitatively analyze 2 266 international documents, this study reveals several key findings: firstly, there has been a consistent increase in articles since 2010, with the United States (29.54%), Australia (9.12%), the United Kingdom(9.05%), Canada (4.71%), and China(4.38%) being the top five contributors. Secondly, disciplinary analysis highlights a clear trend of network agglomeration, with eight top disciplines namely “Energy & Fuel” “Sociology” “Public, Environmental and Occupational Health” “Engineering, Civil” “Forestry” “Anthropology” “Engineering, Geological” and “Engineering, Industrial”. It means that interdisciplinary cooperation and multidisciplinary development become research tendency. Thirdly, although scholar network is generally dispersed, some scholar circles cooperate closely relying on scientific research institutions. Particularly, the “California academic circle” exhibits significant agglomeration degree, followed by the “Colorado academic circle”. Fourthly, research hotspots are clustered by ten topics including “indigenous” “conservation” “urban resilience” “social network” “community development” “COVID-19” “earthquake” “substance abuse” “matrix” and “democracy”. To be more specific, Social network is the core feature which is manifested as long hot period and high burst value. “Place” is common concern among research hotspots. Lastly, research frontiers, identified through burst value analysis, encompasses four directions which are compound-risk governance, spatial-temporal evolution, bottom-up and top-down social network and Multi-system evaluation model. All these will be research challenges. Furthermore, a dataset of cited literature on hotspots and frontiers is connected with urban and spatial planning literature through content analysis. Implications suggest that urban and spatial planning, with its interdisciplinary nature, incorporates spatial analysis tools and planning techniques to reflect interactions among different places. Community resilience assessment, grounded in local characteristics, such as exposure, vulnerability data, service radius of rescue facilities, serves as the correlation basis for urban and spatial planning. A community baseline resilience model aids policymaker in prioritizing mitigation measures for high-risk space based on the complex perspective of multi-scale, spatial-temporal characteristics, differential weightingfactors and spatial autocorrelation characteristics. Notably, urban and spatial planning’s key role is in analyzing and mapping the dependence between component performance and social networks in the built environment. Thus, planners should not only pay attention to the improvement of the internal space and infrastructure in the community, but also take consideration of “dependent space” and “ecosystem connectivity” outside the community owing to the diversity of risks. This may strengthen “risk dispersion”, diversify spatial functions and maneuver facility configuration by land area allocation and spatial optimization layout in higher-level urban planning. The discipline of urban and spatial planning has the highest number of published literatures on community resilience in china, which focus on spatial optimization for disaster risk adaptation. Thus territorial space resilience with three frontier research topics is proposed including the normative definition, evaluation methods under Socio-Eco-Technological systems, and bottom-up social network governance by linking with the international research hotspots, frontier issues and the association with spatial planning. It is necessary to integrate the core characteristics of spatial resilience (focusing on ecological system resilience) and community resilience (focusing on economic and social system resilience) to constructs territorial spatial resilience definition. The new concept emphasizes the improvement of environmental carrying capacity, the human innovation of community system and the perceptibility of smart infrastructure in technological system. It is also a clear research direction to recognize the nonlinear and complex relationship among Socio-Eco- Technological systems and develop general evaluation models to integrate environmental, economic, social, technical and other indicators for territorial space resilience. The study envisions the enhancement of territorial space resilience through stakeholder decision-making and advocates for collective responsibility in “urban and spatial planning based on resilience”. Overall, this paper provides valuable insights for optimizing urban and spatial planning under resilience thinking.
Key words:  community resilience  bibliometrics  urban planning  risk governance