| 摘要: |
| 当前我国疏散避难空间规划暂时
陷入“4 多4 少”的技术局限，“社会生态
韧性”指导的精细化规划将提供解决方案。
以滨海城市潮洪灾害的疏散避难问题为导
向，将灾害风险分解为：“近海高—远海低”
的潮洪致灾性风险、“中心高—外围低”的
人口暴露性风险、“边缘高—轴线低”的救
助敏感性风险。基于社会生态韧性理论，先
建立疏散避难空间物理庇护、集中收容、应
急救助等3 项核心功能分别响应3 种灾害风
险的“适应性循环”机制；再根据循环机
制，生成包括“风险解构—分题规划、循
环升级—情景规划、统分兼顾—行动协同”
的规划控制体系和编制框架，为推动当前
疏散避难空间规划在理论、制度和策略的
扩展提供有益参考。 |
| 关键词: 滨海城市 潮洪灾害风险 疏散
避难空间 社会生态韧性 适应性循环 |
| DOI：10.13791/j.cnki.hsfwest.20230215001 |
| 分类号: |
| 基金项目:国家自然科学基金（52508046）；中国博士后科学基金（2020M680332） |
|
| Evacuation-shelter space planning to tide-flood hazards in coastal cities based on socialecologicalresilience |
|
ZHANG Weitao
|
| Abstract: |
| Urban evacuation-shelter space integrates multiple spatial elements such as shelter places,
disaster prevention roads and rescue facilities, and plays core functions such as physical shelter,
centralized accommodation, and emergency rescue under disaster scenarios. At present, the compilation
of evacuation-shelter space planning (ESP) is stuck in “4-overvalue and 4-underate” problems in
China. It includes: 1) more “space schemes” and less “space operation” (The planning method is
biased to the empirical paradigm and lacks the scientific basis to discuss the operation mechanism of
space system ); 2) more “shallow commonalities” and less “deep characteristics” (Planning results
mostly guide local planning practice with one same set of spatial allocation indicators, lacking
differences in response to disaster decomposition and local characteristics of evacuation; 3) more
“government-led” and less “grass-roots autonomy” (Although grassroots people are encouraged to
exert their autonomy in space use, the planning work is still dominated by the government, which
makes the ideal planning and actual use of space are separated, limiting the effect of space use); 4)
more “design technology” and less “governance ability” (Planning technology mainly serves the
generation stage of space schemes. For the space governance long-term process such as planningconstruction-
management-use, there is a lack of systematic institution system with multiple links).
Refined planning guided by Social-Ecological Resilience will provide solutions. With the evacuationshelter
issue in coastal cities’ tide-flood hazards, to decompose the hazard risk into: 1) the hazardcausing
risk showing “high in coastal area and low in inner land”; 2) the population-exposing risk
showing “high in central area and low in outer land”; 3) the relief-sensitivity risk showing “high in
fringe land and low in axis area”. These 3 hazard dimensions can be responded by the 3 core functions
of urban evacuation-shelter space, physical shelter function, centralized accommodation function, and
emergency rescue function, respectively. Based on Social-Ecological Resilience, to establish the
evacuation-shelter space’s Adaptive Cycle Mechanism. In this mechanism, each evacuation-shelter
space function responding to its particular risk constitutes the sub-mechanism. As for the “physical
shelter function to hazard-causing risk” sub-mechanism, the far sea area of coastal city mainly faces the
risk caused by low-grade tidal flood, and the focus of evacuation-shelter space planning is the nearby
allocation. However, the coastal areas must strengthen the engineering fortification based on the
conventional evacuation-shelter space in the face of high-grade risk. When the hazard-causing risk in
coastal areas is likely to continue to increase, the population should be able to conveniently transfer to
the inner area, and rely on high-grade roads and green forest belts to lay flood prevention and fire
prevention isolation belts around the offshore area. In the “centralized accommodation function to
population-exposing risk” sub-mechanism, the peripheral areas of coastal cities are generally capable
of ensuring that population is accommodated on a full scale in nearby vertical shelters. But to the
central area, it is necessary to improve the scale capacity and use order of evacuation-shelter space by
updating facilities, and improving the signage and guidance function. As the risk in central areas
continues to increase, more population will need to receive accommodation, especially long-termaccommodation, with higher per capita standards after a disaster, and these people will need to move to more abundant shelters in outer areas. In the
“emergency rescue function to relief-sensitivity risk” sub-mechanism, the development axial area of the coastal city can, on the one hand, play an effective
emergency rescue function in the first time after the disaster through the balanced allocation of community-level administrative, medical, fire protection and
material storage facilities, cooperating with the evacuation-shelter space; on the other hand, it can be served by nearby urban-level rescue facilities with
dispatching rescue services of higher standard, more functions and larger scale to shelters. However, due to the higher sensitivity in fringe areas, private
hospitals, commercial facilities and elderly care institutions should be signed to increase nearby rescue resources and the ability to help vulnerable people.
When the sensitivity risk is upgraded, it is also necessary to add disaster prevention bases in fringe areas, getting large-scale human and material resources from
urban-level rescue facilities outside the city and low-sensitive areas in the city, cooperating with local evacuation-shelter space to play a more reliable rescue
function.According to this mechanism, the methodology and framework of ESP are generated, includes “Special Planning under risk decomposing” “Scenario
Planning under adaptive updating” “Action Planning under pooling and differing”. It propels the improvement of traditional ESP in theory, strategy, and
institution. First, in the theoretical level, it propels an expansion from “space” to “human-space-disaster”. Secondly, it promotes an expansion in the system
layer from the “government-led” to “multilayer autonomy under government control”. Thirdly, in the strategy layer it drives an expansion from “space design”
to “space governance”. |
| Key words: coastal city tide-flood hazard risk evacuation-shelter space social-ecological resilience adaptive cycle |
