|
|
| |
|
|
| 本文已被：浏览 73次 下载 0次 |
|
|
|
| 中国资源型城市转型研究进展与展望 |
|
卢硕, 张文忠
|
|
中国科学院地理科学与资源研究所
|
|
| 摘要: |
| 资源型城市转型是中国区域发展的重大战略议题。围绕“资源型城市转型研究”，系统梳理该领域的研究演进规律，对于深化理论认知与指导实践具有重要意义。本文以近二十年中国资源型城市转型发展的核心文献为研究对象,运用CiteSpace突现词检测与知识图谱分析方法,从政策演变、研究脉络和学术热点三个维度系统剖析该领域的发展态势与演进规律。研究发现,该领域呈现政策导向与学术探索协同演进特征,发展历程可划分为三个阶段:纾困解难期聚焦接续产业培育与生态修复;分类治理期拓展至生命周期分析与政策绩效评估;高质量发展期转向绿色低碳、创新驱动与数字赋能等前沿议题。突现词动态演变反映研究议题与国家战略的高度耦合,整体呈现学科交叉深化、范式多元、理论本土化创新趋势。研究指出在碳中和、城市更新等新导向下,需在绿色转型机制、空间-社会协同治理、数字化创新等议题上实现突破,为构建系统化与前瞻性的理论方法体系提供参考。 |
| 关键词: 资源型城市 转型 CiteSpace 政策演变 协同演进 |
| DOI： |
| 分类号:TU981 |
| 基金项目:国家自然科学基金面上项目（42471203）；国家自然科学基金青年项目（42501206） |
|
| Research Progress and Prospect of Research on the Transition of Resource-Based Cities in China |
|
LuShuo, Wenzhong Zhang
|
|
中国科学院地理科学与资源研究所
|
| Abstract: |
| The transition of resource-based cities represents a crucial strategic issue in China’s regional development agenda. These cities, which have historically relied heavily on the extraction and processing of natural resources, face significant challenges in ensuring sustainable growth, environmental protection, and economic diversification. In this context, research focused on the transformation of resource-based cities has gained increasing academic and policy relevance. This paper conducts a systematic review and bibliometric analysis of the core literature on this topic over the past two decades, with the aim of uncovering the developmental logic and evolution patterns that characterize this research field. By leveraging CiteSpace’s burst detection and knowledge mapping tools, the study investigates the field’s evolution from the perspectives of policy change, research trajectories, and academic hotspots. Transitioning from foundational inquiry to empirical synthesis, the study reveals that the evolution of research on the transformation of resource-based cities in China has been shaped by a dynamic interplay between policy guidance and academic exploration. This dual-track development has led to the emergence of a coherent yet diversified body of knowledge. According to the analysis, the evolution of this field can be broadly divided into three key stages, each marked by distinct themes and paradigmatic shifts in both policy focus and research orientation. The first stage, identified as the crisis mitigation phase, is characterized by scholarly and policy attention centered on industrial succession and ecological restoration. During this period, the primary goal was to address the economic downturn and environmental degradation that followed resource depletion. Research emphasized the importance of fostering alternative industries and initiating basic environmental remediation projects. Transitioning from survival to stability, efforts during this phase laid the groundwork for more comprehensive transformation strategies. The second stage, referred to as the differentiated governance phase, witnessed a notable broadening of the analytical lens. Scholars began to explore the life-cycle dynamics of resource-based cities, emphasizing the heterogeneity among cities at different stages of resource exhaustion and development. Research expanded to include performance evaluations of policy interventions, fiscal sustainability, employment resilience, and institutional capacity. Transitioning from uniform solutions to tailored governance models, this phase highlighted the necessity of adopting nuanced and context-specific strategies for urban transformation. The third and most recent stage is identified as the high-quality development phase. This period marks a transition towards frontier topics such as green and low-carbon transformation, innovation-driven development, and digital empowerment. The emergence of these themes reflects the broader national shift toward sustainable development and technological modernization. Scholars now focus on how resource-based cities can leverage digital technologies, promote green industries, and foster innovation ecosystems to achieve high-quality transformation. This stage is further characterized by the convergence of multiple disciplines including urban planning, environmental science, economics, and data science—indicating a deepening of interdisciplinary integration. Transitioning from thematic evolution to methodological insights, the study also analyzes the burst keywords and their dynamic shifts over time. The co-evolution of research topics and national strategies is clearly evident: keyword bursts show strong alignment with major policy initiatives such as the “New Urbanization Plan,” the “National Sustainable Development Agenda,” and more recently, “carbon peaking and neutrality goals.” This coupling indicates that the research agenda is not only shaped by academic interest but also strongly driven by state-level strategic priorities. Furthermore, the findings underscore three overarching trends in the academic development of this field: increasing interdisciplinarity, methodological diversification, and theoretical localization. Interdisciplinarity is evident in the integration of environmental science, economics, sociology, and geography, forming a comprehensive lens for understanding urban transformation. Methodological diversification is reflected in the application of big data, spatial analysis, and policy simulation techniques. Theoretical localization, meanwhile, involves the adaptation and innovation of existing Western urban theories within China’s unique institutional and socio-political context. Transitioning from retrospective insights to future directions, the study highlights key emerging research areas that warrant further exploration. Under the new imperatives of carbon neutrality, urban regeneration, and sustainable innovation, scholars are called to advance the discourse in several domains. First, there is a need to deepen research on green transformation mechanisms—particularly how cities can achieve systemic shifts towards sustainability in their industrial structures and energy consumption. Second, the issue of spatial-social coordinated governance must be addressed, including questions of equity, inclusivity, and public participation in urban transformation. Third, the role of digital technologies in enabling transformation—through smart governance, digital twins, and intelligent infrastructure—remains a promising but underexplored area. In conclusion, the transformation of resource-based cities in China is a complex, multi-dimensional process that demands ongoing theoretical innovation and practical experimentation. This study contributes to the academic literature by mapping the historical trajectory, thematic evolution, and methodological diversification of this field, while also identifying key areas for future scholarly inquiry. It offers a valuable reference for policymakers, researchers, and practitioners working to foster sustainable, resilient, and innovation-driven urban futures in resource-dependent regions. |
| Key words: resource-based cities transformation CiteSpace policy evolution co-evolution |
|
|
|
|
