地理研究 ›› 2020, Vol. 39 ›› Issue (5): 1028-1044.doi: 10.11821/dlyj020190993

• 经济地理学理论前沿与反思 • 上一篇    下一篇

超越“演化”:老工业区重构研究进展与范式反思

胡晓辉1, 朱晟君2(), RobertHassink3   

  1. 1.浙江财经大学公共管理学院,杭州 310018
    2.北京大学城市与环境学院,北京 100871
    3.基尔大学经济地理系,基尔24118,德国
  • 收稿日期:2019-11-14 修回日期:2020-03-29 出版日期:2020-05-20 发布日期:2020-07-20
  • 通讯作者: 朱晟君
  • 作者简介:胡晓辉(1982-),男,浙江湖州人,博士,副教授,博士生导师,主要研究方向为演化经济地理与地方产业动态、老工业区重构和区域经济韧性。E-mail: xhhugeo@gmail.com
  • 基金资助:
    国家自然科学基金青年项目(41601113);浙江省钱江人才计划(2017C);国家自然科学基金面上项目(41971154);国家自然科学基金青年项目(1701115);国家自然科学基金重点项目(41731278)

Beyond the “evolutionary approach”: A critical review and paradigmatic reflections on the restructuring of old industrial areas

HU Xiaohui1, ZHU Shengjun2(), Robert HASSINK3   

  1. 1.School of Public Administration, Zhejiang University of Finance and Economics, Hangzhou 310018, China
    2.College of Urban and Environmental Sciences, Peking University, Beijing 100871, China
    3.Department of Geography, Kiel University, Kiel 24118, Germany
  • Received:2019-11-14 Revised:2020-03-29 Online:2020-05-20 Published:2020-07-20
  • Contact: ZHU Shengjun

摘要:

老工业区重构是经济地理学的重要研究议题。在全球化步伐放缓和全球制造业下行的宏观背景下,老工业区已愈来愈成为各国发展战略制定的核心对象。对近十年有关老工业区重构的中外文献进行细致梳理,指出了当下研究存在范式应用多元化的趋势,但这些范式在概念使用、尺度聚焦、时空侧重和机制解释上存在显著差异,缺乏相互融合和优势互补,面临现实应用瓶颈。特别是,长期用于解释老工业区重构的演化经济地理学,因其忽视多尺度-多主体-多分析单元的能动性作用而难以有效解释重构过程、机制、结果及其背后的地理性。本文将转型研究中的多层次视角同演化范式相结合,提供了一种具备上下因果辩证解释力的多尺度分析框架,能有效解释老工业区重构问题。在此基础上,探讨了未来研究方向。

关键词: 老工业区, 重构, 演化经济地理学, 转型研究, 多层次视角, 范式反思

Abstract:

The restructuring of old industrial areas is one of the most important research topics in economic geography. In the macro context of the slowdown of globalization and the worldwide decrease of manufacturing production and demand, old industrial areas as typical problem regions have increasingly become a core target in national development strategies among many countries. Drawing upon an in-depth critical review of recent literature on the restructuring of old industrial areas in the past decade, this paper addresses the growing trend of variegated adoptions of paradigms in the research including four key approaches, namely, evolutionary economic geography, relational economic geography, institutional economic geography and geographical political economy. It also stresses that the gaps yet comparative merits in conceptual thinking, scale focus, tempo-spatial sensitivity and mechanism/process explanation among these paradigms have not generated enough intellectual interplays and complementation, but rather, have led to paradigmatic fragmentation and even repellence with each other. Despite the diversification in paradigmatic use for research, the increase of “fragmented” rather than “engaged pluralism” potentially hinders the explanatory power of existing theories and approaches in empirical research. In particular, we argue that evolutionary economic geography, arguably the most popular paradigm used in explaining and understanding the restructuring of old industrial areas, clearly suffers from a neglect of the role of multi-scalar and multi-actor agencies and a lack of multiple units of analysis in affecting the restructuring processes, mechanisms, outcomes and their geographies of old industrial areas. Given this, the paper integrates the multi-level perspective (MPL) in sustainability transition studies into the evolutionary economic geography approach. It builds up a multi-scalar analytical framework incorporating analyses of both downward and upward causation with different geographical scales, in which the interplay of micro-level change agency-based niche, meso-level regional path developmental regime and macro-level political-economic context landscape is positioned as the core for analyzing the restructuring of old industrial areas. This comprehensive multi-scalar framework is able to offer a better understanding of the restructuring of old industrial areas. Based on that, we further suggest several key orientations and agendas for future research on the topic.

Key words: old industrial areas, restructuring, evolutionary economic geography, transition studies, multi-level perspective, paradigmatic reflections