EN中文

地理研究 >

2019 , Vol. 38 >Issue 1: 146 - 154

DOI: https://doi.org/10.11821/dlyj020180503

空间正义与新型城镇化研究的方法论

  • 叶超
展开
  • 华东师范大学地理科学学院,崇明生态研究院,上海 200241

作者简介：叶超（1978- ）,男,甘肃武威人,教授,博士生导师,主要从事城市化与空间生产、地理学思想与方法、文化地理研究。E-mail:

收稿日期: 2018-07-24

  要求修回日期: 2018-10-25

  网络出版日期: 2019-01-20

基金资助

国家自然科学基金项目（41571138,41871143）

上海市教委“曙光计划”课题（17SG27）

收起

The methodology on spatial justice and new-type urbanization

  • YE Chao
Expand
  • School of Geographic Science & Institute of Eco-Chongming, East China Normal University, Shanghai 200241, China

Received date: 2018-07-24

  Request revised date: 2018-10-25

  Online published: 2019-01-20

Copyright

《地理研究》编辑部 所有
Fold

摘要

在经济社会转型和进入新常态的背景下,以往重数量、规模扩张和经济效益的快速城镇化模式引发的许多空间不公正问题开始突显出来,如何实现土地资源配置、空间发展权利等方面的公平,亟需用空间正义的理论思维去反思和重构中国的城镇化发展模式。空间正义理论具有社会空间、多尺度性、批判建构三个主要特征,它们对城镇化研究和实践产生重要影响。西方地理学界对空间正义已有较充分的理论讨论,实践案例亦很丰富,国内还处在初步了解和探索的阶段,缺少适合中国体制和社会发展需求的理论。通过对空间正义思想与理论的梳理,提倡综合运用多种方法,进行多尺度、多主体综合分析和案例比较,探讨和总结基于空间正义的中国城镇化演化机理与发展模式。在社会空间辩证法的指导下,运用定性、多尺度、多智能体的方法,揭示中国城镇化进程的演变机制,寻找改善途径进而实现城市空间正义。将空间正义思想用于城乡发展与规划,可为城镇化研究提供新视角,并引导城镇化转型,实现经济社会及城乡的常态发展。

关键词： 城镇化; 空间正义; 尺度; 社会空间; 批判

本文引用格式

叶超 . 空间正义与新型城镇化研究的方法论[J]. 地理研究, 2019 , 38(1) : 146 -154 . DOI: 10.11821/dlyj020180503

Abstract

In the context of economic-social transformation and entering the new normal, many spatial injustice problems have emerged due to the previous rapid urbanization mode, which is characterized by emphasis of the quantity, scale expansion and economic benefits. How to achieve the equality of land resource allocation and space development rights are urgently needed to use the theoretical thinking of spatial justice to reflect and reconstruct China's urbanization development mode. The theory of spatial justice has three features: social space, multi-scale and critical construction, which have a significant impact on urbanization research and practice. Western geographers have already had sufficient theoretical discussions on spatial justice with rich practical cases. However, China is still in the initial stage of exploration, lacking the theory that is suitable for China's system and social development needs. Through combining the ideas and the theories of spatial justice, this paper advocates the integrated use of multiple methods to conduct comprehensive analysis and case comparison of multi-scale and multi-agent, explores and summarizes the evolution mechanism and development mode of China's urbanization based on spatial justice. Informed by the socio-spatial dialectic, this paper uses qualitative, multi-scale and multi-agent methods to reveal the evolution mechanism of China's urbanization, seeking for improvement ways so as to realize urban spatial justice. Utilizing the idea of spatial justice to rural-urban development and planning can provide a new perspective for urbanization research and guide the transformation of urbanization to achieve the normal development of economic society and rural-urban areas.

Key words： urbanization; spatial justice; scale; social space; criticism

1 引言

2016年,中国城镇化率达到57.4%,城镇化中期阶段的到来,预示着中国城镇化已进入一个至关重要的转型期。中国经济社会将从高速进入新常态发展,走新型城镇化道路已成为共识。“新型”说明城镇化不同于过去重规模和数量扩张的传统模式,但其机制、模式和道路还不具体,有待理论发展和建构。结合现实问题和理论前沿,前瞻性地从空间正义视角探索城镇化转型的新路径已成为一项紧要的课题。
近年来,中国的快速城镇化在取得重大成就的同时,也引发一系列空间不正义问题。比较典型的有：资源和福利分配的不平等导致城乡、区域、阶层差距急剧扩大;征地拆迁以及补偿不公导致冲突;城市上马重化工项目引发群体性事件,严重的灰霾污染;城市空间隔离与排斥,弱势群体、低收入阶层空间被挤压;女性、同性恋没有足够的公共空间反映出的性（别）歧视问题等。
不同层面或尺度的空间不正义已经影响到城镇化的健康发展。空间正义（spatial justice）视空间与社会为一体,揭示（社会）空间生产过程中存在的不同空间尺度（从身体到全球）和领域（资源、土地、环境、性别等）的差别及其引发的空间不平等,并力图通过实践活动改变。城镇化对空间正义的响应,也就是城镇化所涉及的不同主体以及研究、规划、政策和实践等环节影响和改变不正义城镇化（urbanization of injustice）的过程。西方地理学界对此已有较充分的理论探讨和案例研究,但其城镇化问题与中国存在较大区别[1,2],所以中国城镇化响应空间正义的路径和机制必然不同于西方。相比之下,国内学界对空间正义的研究还比较欠缺,处于起始阶段,因此,在借鉴国外理论的基础上,批判性地引入空间正义思想研究中国城镇化问题,不但具有很强的现实意义,也是重要的理论探索。

2 空间正义的理论要旨：社会空间、批判建构与尺度综合

2.1 从社会正义到空间正义

空间正义与城镇化思想之间不但有深刻的历史渊源,而且是近年来国际人文地理研究的热点和前沿。从历史来看,正义、社会（空间）与城镇化之间存在着必然的紧密联系。正义是一个比较复杂的概念,与价值判断和道德直接相关,尚没有统一接受的定义。对个体而言,意味着一种基于良知的道德律令;但更重要的是社会正义,意味着“每个人都能够公平地获得其应该获得的事物”[3]。所以,正义的理念和价值具有普遍性、超越性甚至绝对性,但区分正义与非正义问题是相对的,并没有一个绝对的正义标准适合任何时代和任何地方。这也说明空间正义概念的必要性。在很多政治哲学家,尤其是罗尔斯看来,“正义是社会的首要价值”[4]。从“乌托邦”的首创者莫尔[5]到“田园城市”的奠基人霍华德[6],再到现代著名的规划学者弗里德曼[7],都把“社会性”视为城市发展的核心,并为解决他们所处时代的不正义城镇化问题而进行理论建构。以此来看,社会正义应该在城市研究中占据重要地位。但是,社会政治哲学与（城市）地理学科间貌似严格的学科界限使得这两个领域很少交流和互动。一些空想社会主义者和马克思主义经典作家也曾论及正义与城市发展的问题,但由于对空间的忽视,专门的、系统的论述还很缺乏,更不用提空间正义。
自20世纪70年代开始,空间正义开始成为西方地理学界研究的主题。法国思想家列斐伏尔首创性地将社会与空间联系起来,提出“空间的生产”理论,认为“（社会）空间是（社会的）产物”[8]。这种（社会）空间思想为空间正义研究铺平了道路,因为空间（不）正义正是内蕴于（社会）空间生产的过程之中。在列斐伏尔思想的激发以及1970年代世界范围内剧烈变动的社会政治环境的影响之下,哈维出版了论述城镇化与社会正义关系的奠基之作,也是被引用次数最多的城市研究著作之一——《社会正义与城市》,并创造“社会过程-空间形式”这一概念强调社会与空间的辩证统一[9]。借助马克思主义的理论,哈维此后继续深入阐发了社会正义与空间、环境、城市规划、城镇化之间的关系[10,11],并构建了历史-地理唯物主义的空间理论体系。1980年代开始,更多地理学者开始关注地理不平等、资源分配不均以及区域发展不平衡引起的不正义城镇化的问题[12,13,14,15,16,17]。令人费解的是,虽然1983年就正式出现空间正义一词[18],但它并未流行。包括哈维在内的学者更多采用非正义的城镇化和领地正义（territorial justice）的概念,而很少用空间正义[19]。

2.2 空间正义的流行

进入21世纪后,空间正义突然盛行,而且“进入多个领域的当代议程之中”[20]。不但思想争辩和理论研究非常活跃,而且涌现了更多的案例研究[21,22]。在理论研究方面,最值得一提的是索亚[20]历经10年积累而写成的《寻求空间正义》（seeking spatial justice）一书。它是一部系统总结空间正义思想和理论的集大成之作,标志着空间正义研究进入一个建构体系的新阶段。案例研究上,除了对发达国家城市如洛杉矶、格拉斯哥、亚特兰大等城市黑人和低收入群体空间不正义问题的研究[23,24,25],发展中国家的研究者也开始关注其所处城市（如巴西圣保罗）的空间正义[26]。以空间正义为名的实践活动也相继开展。大型国际学术研讨会、展示会开始召开,期刊开设了空间正义的论坛,一些大学成立了空间正义的研究团队并讲授相关课程[20]。更有趣的是,出现了一个直接以空间正义命名的非盈利网站（http://spatialjustice.org）,它专门提供大量用于揭示空间（非）正义的数据和图件。隶属于联合国教科文组织的国际社会科学委员会也决定将2016年世界社会科学论坛的主题定为不平等和社会正义,表明不平等和正义问题正在成为世界关注的焦点。经过40多年的发展历程,空间正义的思想和理论趋于成熟,积淀了丰富的案例,而且已转化为实践行动。但空间正义也存在一些理论难题,比如索亚也未给出一个明确的、一般的空间正义概念,而且没有解释清楚其中的一些关键问题：在空间正义思想沉寂到爆发这一较长时间段内,虽然正式提出空间正义概念,却未得到更多关注,为什么此阶段学术界对空间正义思想的响应比较微弱?2000年之后,空间正义研究的爆发是突然还是必然?这些重要的理论问题都可以进行批判地解构。
环境正义（environmental justice）是空间正义的一个重要分支。它主要聚焦于环境污染、有毒垃圾和设备对有色人种以及低收入群体的影响[27,28,29]。在研究方法上,有的从政治地理学角度批判分析和搭建框架[30,31,32],还有一些借助大数据技术[33]、数量方法、空间统计学和GIS进行环境正义相关性的评估[34,35]。很多地理学者强调了环境正义尺度的重要性[36,37,38,39]。环境正义的方法（论）,尤其是从不同尺度进行量化评估和批判分析的方法对于空间正义也是适用的。

2.3 空间正义的多尺度综合与批判性建构

除了社会空间之外,空间正义理论还具有两大特点：多尺度综合、批判性建构。所谓多尺度综合,是指空间正义既可以按照地理单元尺度从小（如后现代地理学中的“身体”）到大（全球尺度）进行推移,又可以按照具体内涵侧重分为环境、领地（土地）、（狭义的）社会、文化、性（别）等内容,这些尺度之间错综交织。批判性建构,意味着在揭示不正义城镇化复杂本质的同时,提出新的理论框架,并用于规划和实践。这两方面都有具体的案例体现。以巴尔的摩为例,哈维在《希望的空间》中从整个城市的尺度论述非正义城镇化的过程,并力图构建新“乌托邦”[11];而在另一处则从该市建设高速公路的微观尺度案例切入,归纳出正义因不同的实践、空间和个体而异的重要思想[40]。虽然索亚选择洛杉矶作为案例,但他和哈维相似之处是都把这种批判分析上升为一种理论建构,而且都密切联系规划实践,进而倡导正义的城镇化[9,10,20]。
相对而言,国内对空间正义的研究还比较滞后,因而总体上还处在一个起步阶段。2005年后,国内哲学和社会科学界开始将空间正义与中国城镇化问题联系起来进行初步引申和探讨[41]。其后,哈维、索亚等人的空间正义思想被引入和介绍[42,43,44,45]。有人对空间正义的文献进行一定的梳理,试图在辨明空间正义内涵的前提下,将空间正义思想引入到中国城镇化研究中[46]。这些研究大都看到了空间正义对城镇化的重要性,并自然地将二者联系起来阐发,但由于文献梳理还不系统,空间尺度内涵把握不透,相关案例研究缺乏,使得理论思辨、方法探索和实际应用方面的深度和广度还比较欠缺。
在地理学界,王兴中[47,48]最早并持续地开展了城市社会空间公正的研究,将空间公正理论与城市社区体系规划联系起来,提出新区域主义的空间公正理念[49,50]。虽然国内地理学者较少使用空间正义这一概念（空间正义与空间公正实际上是同一概念,翻译不同而已,译为空间正义更准确些）,但很多研究与空间正义直接相关,而且在不同层面展开。宏观层面,城镇化发展中出现了许多对资源环境的破坏和规模扩张带来的土地利用失衡的“冒进”,以及城市空间资源被权力主导而配置不公的问题[51,52];中观层面,中国城市社会空间分异、城市摊贩的空间政治等研究实际上涉及许多空间正义的问题,如富裕阶层与贫困人群空间的对立,新移民、非正规的以及黑人社区的社会空间被排斥和挤压,进入城市的权利等[53,54,55,56];微观层面,城乡结合部养猪场空间生产的实例和社会地理学视角的研究都提出了农民工的空间正义问题[57,58];还有从资本空间和体制转型角度对城市社会空间演变的研究[59,60]。社会文化地理学及其研究中与不平等的空间相关的问题其实都涉及空间正义[61,62],在一些关于空间生产的文献中,已经包含空间正义的思想或问题[63,64]。尽管视角各异,社会空间却是城镇化研究普遍关注的[65,66,67,68]。

3 空间正义与城镇化研究的方法论

3.1 空间正义与城镇化研究的尺度综合

本文力图将城镇化与空间正义的方法论与方法辩证地予以思考并紧密结合起来。根据空间正义的三大方法论：社会空间辩证法、多尺度综合和批判性建构,选择相应的具体方法。社会空间辩证法强调（广义的）社会、空间与时间之间的两两交互作用,最终形成三元辩证关系。据此细分空间正义的三大尺度（图1）：空间层面为身体-地方-地域-区域（城乡）-国家-全球;时间层面为短期（突发事件）、中期（如改革开放30多年）和长期（历史）;（广义的）社会层面为资源、环境、土地、阶层、性别、文化。这三个尺度的交互作用对应着地理学传统的“格局—过程—机理”的方法论,通过空间正义发掘城镇化演化机制离不开对格局和过程的分析。在机理层面,重点是厘清人地关系（资源、环境、土地）与“人人关系”（阶层、性别、文化）作用的过程与动力。
Fig. 1 The segmentation and integration of spatial justice and urbanization scale

图1 空间正义与城镇化尺度细分与综合

在具体研究中,遵循社会空间辩证法的原则,先假定其中一者不变,考察其他两种不同尺度的交互作用,然后综合不同尺度空间正义的特点,进而归纳提炼城镇化演化机制。在批判建构方面,划分三个向度：研究者以局外人角度进行的“他者批判”,研究者同时也是研究对象的“自我批判”以及研究者虽然身处其中却力图跳出环境的“第三方批判”。

3.2 多智能体模拟的方法

多智能体是进行复杂分析与模拟的工具,其“自下而上”的思路与强大的计算和时空动态的特性使得它在模拟复杂的时空特征方面具有非常突出的优势[69]。目前已有研究利用智能体分析城市问题、环境污染、医疗、收入等的集聚与不公平分布[70,71],因此应用智能体建模方法来研究空间正义对城镇化的影响,有其独特优势。利用NetLogo多智能体建模仿真集成环境,将空间用多个单网格以及与之对应的多个静态Agent来表示,因此可以将系统的时空动态特征描述出来。主体的行为用编程语言定制,居民可同意或否定开发商的计划,而政府则会根据情况进行相关的决策,最终影响居民和城镇化。NetLogo中的编程语言支持主体操作和并发运行。智能体还可以帮助决策,构建多智能体模型,模拟相关人群在特殊事件下的反应,通过情景设计,反演采取措施与否的不同后果。
利用多智能体模型模拟利益相关者对土地利用变化的作用及土地利用变化后的影响,考察如何从不正义的城镇化到空间正义的城镇化（图2）。在征地拆迁这一案例中,城镇化使得原来可能只具有自然属性的土地资源成为社会资源,政府、开发商与居民等智能体围绕土地利用会有一系列行为决策,这些不同的行为决策影响城镇化的质量与结果。在非正义的城镇化进程中（虚线箭头所示）,开发商智能体只是把土地作为资本追逐的对象,而政府可能是以政绩或GDP为主要追求,他们两者在土地问题上存在博弈;居民要求进入城市的权利,但由于其与开发商、政府智能体存在收益和权力上的不平等（空间不正义的起始状态）,所以,他的权利受到诸多限制。而要实现正义的城镇化,可能的路径或策略在于改变或制约其主要诉求使智能体力量逐渐实现均衡,如可以尝试的路径是（实线箭头所示）：用民众能参与的、法定的规划来制约资本对土地的贪婪和对自然环境的消极影响,用制度来改变政府唯GDP的政绩观并规范政府行为,只有让居民智能体获得更多的、参与其中的权利,城镇化才是真正人本的、正义的城镇化。当然,在实际模拟中,可以根据现实案例,不断尝试不同类型策略,以逐步实现正义的城镇化。
Fig. 2 The agent simulation framework of spatial justice and urbanization (case of land expropriation demolition)

图2 空间正义与城镇化的智能体模拟框架（征地拆迁案例）

4 结论与讨论

正义概念本身因时空和实践而异。虽然空间正义在西方学界已有较充分的讨论,但是它并未形成一个严整的理论体系。包括中国在内的发展中国家空间正义的理论和案例研究也比较缺乏。中外不同的城镇化路径和体制决定了它们的空间（不）正义问题及其形成机制是不一样的。中国的城镇化具有复杂的演变特征[72],根据中国城镇化的特点,有选择地借鉴和吸收空间正义的思想和方法,并用本土案例进行实证研究显得尤为重要。
地理学家是提出和推动空间正义理论与实践的主要群体。空间正义理论的多尺度综合是地理学的传统方法,批判性建构既是西方人文地理学的前沿,又是中国人文地理学界亟需引入和补充的新方法论。空间正义对其他自然科学和社会科学（如环境科学和社会哲学）也产生重要影响,在教学、规划和实践中也有较大的反响。这应该引起国内地理学者的重视。在空间正义思想发展历程中,非常值得借鉴的一条路径是：不正义的城镇化—批判思维—理论建构—案例剖析—发掘机制—规划重构—实践活动—正义的城镇化。这一过程实际上大体对应着城镇化对空间正义的响应。
作为一种社会过程,城镇化涉及众多主体（不同领域的学者、不同利益诉求的政府部门、不同收入水平的群体或阶层、规划师、以及包括网络在内的媒体等）。空间正义来自于这些主体,取决于他（她）们,也指向他（她）们。城镇化涉及人的发展、城乡互动、资源环境三个内涵[73]。重要的是从空间正义理念出发,构建新的城镇化模式以反映和协调不同主体权利和利益,进而实现正义的城镇化。其中的关键问题是：如何度量空间正义?不同类型的主体通过什么样的路径和方法才能达至正义的城镇化?不同尺度（从身体到全球）的城镇化响应空间正义的过程与机制是否相同?这些难题的答案是复杂的,这也说明从方法论角度考察空间正义与新型城镇化的关联的重要性。
从中国快速城镇化模式引发的空间不正义问题出发,通过对空间正义思想与理论的梳理建立一个新的理论框架,运用质性研究以及多智能体模型模拟等方法,对中国城镇化进行新的多尺度、多主体的综合分析,进而探讨基于空间正义的城镇化演化机制及其发展模式,最后将其用于规划和实践,将为中国城镇化研究注入新的思维和活力,并有利于促进中国人文地理学理论和方法的自主创新。

The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.

参考文献

原文顺序 | 文献年度倒序 | 文中引用次数倒序
[1]
顾朝林. 中国城市发展的新趋势. 城市规划, 2006, 30(3): 26-31.从信息化、全球化和高技术发展正在重建世界出发,概述了中国城市已经参与全球化进程,城市的发展出现某些新趋势,主要表现在:国家城市体系内不是所有城市的快速增长,而是一些与全球化进程相连接的关键城市的发展.具体体现在几个城市的城市功能的全球化,城市规模的巨型化,城市间交流的快速化,以及城市联盟及其一体化,以发展中的全球城市为核心的全球城市区正在发育之中.

DOI

[Gu Chaolin.New trends of China's urban development. City Planning Review, 2006, 30(3): 26-31.]

[2]
宁越敏. 建设中国特色的城市地理学: 中国城市地理学的研究进展评述. 人文地理, 2008, 23(2): 1-5.城市地理在中国是一门新兴的学科,在最近的三十年里得到了迅速的发展.本文主要评述1980年以来中国城市地理学在城市化、城市体系和城市经济与社会地理的研究进展.本文认为中国经济的迅速起飞导致中国经济和社会的迅速转型,这为中国城市地理学的发展带来难得的机遇.通过近三十年的努力,中国城市地理学巴形成自己的研究特色,特别是在城市化和城市体系研究方面巴形成自己的独特理论,并具有高度的实践性.

[Ning Yuemin.Construction of urban geography with China's characteristics: Commentary on the research progress of China's urban geography. Human Geography, 2008, 23(2): 1-5.]

[3]
俞可平. 重新思考平等、公平和正义. 学术月刊, 2017, (4): 5-14.现代汉语中的“公正”，更多是指“公平正义”的简称。“平等”的一般意义，指的是一种无差别的结果或状态。作为一个政治学概念的“平等”，它指的是人们享有同等的人格、基础资源、基本权利、重要能力和社会地位。“公平”则是一个程序和过程的概念，就是按照相同的原则分配公共权利和社会资源，并且根据相同的原则处理事情和进行评价。“正义”本质上是一个应然的概念。对于个人而言，“正义”就是每个人出于自身良知而产生的“应该做什么”和“应该得到什么”的道德命令。对于社会而言，“正义”就是每一个人都能够公平地获得其应该获得的事物。可见，“平等”是人类最基本的权利，“公平”是社会制度的首要原则，而“正义”则是人类社会之首善。

[Yu Keping.Rethinking equality, fairness and justice. Academic Monthly, 2017, (4): 5-14.]

[4]
Rawls J.A Theory of Justice. Cambridge, Mass: Harvard University Press, 1971.

[5]
莫尔. 乌托邦. 戴镏龄译. 北京:商务印书馆, 1982.

[More Thomas.Utopia. Translated by Dai Liuling. Beijing: Commercial Press, 1982.]

[6]
Howard E.Garden Cities of Tomorrow. Cambridge: MIT Press, 1984.

[7]
Friedmann J.The good city: In defense of utopian thinking. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, 2000, 24(2): 460-472.Key Words】：

DOI

[8]
Lefebvre H.The Production of Space. Oxford: Blackwell, 1991.

[9]
Harvey D.Social Justice and the City. Oxford: Blackwell, 1973.Throughout his distinguished and influential career, David Harvey has defined and redefined the relationship between politics, capitalism, and the social aspects of geographical theory. Laying out Harvey's position that geography could not remain objective in the face of urban poverty and associated ills, Social Justice and the City is perhaps the most widely cited work in the field. Harvey analyzes core issues in city planning and policy-employment and housing location, zoning, transport costs, concentrations of poverty-asking in each case about the relationship between social justice and space. How, for example, do built-in assumptions about planning reinforce existing distributions of income? Rather than leading him to liberal, technocratic solutions, Harvey's line of inquiry pushes him in the direction of a "revolutionary geography," one that transcends the structural limitations of existing approaches to space. Harvey's emphasis on rigorous thought and theoretical innovation gives the volume an enduring appeal. This is a book that raises big questions, and for that reason geographers and other social scientists regularly return to it.

DOI

[10]
Harvey D.Justice, Nature and the Geography of Difference. Oxford: Blackwell, 1996.Shakespeare and the geography of difference John Gillies （Cambridge studies in Renaissance literature and culture, 4） Cambridge University Press, 1994 : pbk

DOI

[11]
Harvey D.Space of Hope. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, 2000.

[12]
Smith N.Uneven Development: Nature, Capital and the Production of Space. Oxford: Blackwell, 1984.

[13]
Smith N.Gentrification and the rent gap. Annals of the Association of American Geographers, 1987, 77(3): 462-465.First page of article

DOI

[14]
Smith D.Geography and Social Justice. Oxford: Blackwell, 1994.

[15]
Soja E.Postmodern Geographies: The Reassertion of Space in Critical Social Theory. London: Verso, 1989.Building on the work of Foucault, Giddens, Jameson and Lefebvre, one of America's foremost geographers argues for a radical rethinking of the dialectics of space, time and social being.

DOI

[16]
Soja E.Third Space: Journeys to Los Angeles and Other Real-And-Imagined Places. Oxford: Blackwell, 1996.

DOI

[17]
Proctor J.Ethics in geography: giving moral form to the geographical imagination. Area, 2005, 30(1): 8-18.Geographers have become increasingly interested in questions of ethics. In this paper, I introduce the scope and major concerns of ethics, briefly reviewing recent literature as a means of situating geography's potential contribution. I then link ethics to the geographical imagination by developing a twofold schema representing geography's ontological project and epistemological process, an approach that unites existing professional and substantive ethical concerns among geographers. Examples of recent work by geographers in these areas are noted. I close with a set of broad questions at the interface of ethics and geography worthy of further reflection.

DOI

[18]
Pirie G.On spatial justice. Environment and Planning A, 1983, 15(4): 465-473.

DOI

[19]
Hay A.Concepts of equity, fairness and justice in geographical studies. Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers New Series, 1995, 20(4): 500-508.Notions of equity, fairness and justice frequently appear in geographical writing. It may be argued that eight distinct concepts underlie this usage, all of which are relevant to the study of geographical distributions. Such applications introduce complications in terms of measurement (due to problems of geographical data-collection units and ecological correlations). The common geographical operationalization of spatial equality, territorial justice and minimum standards can be related to the underlying concepts. Differences in the use of the concepts may also be an element in regional description and comparison.

DOI

[20]
Soja E. Seeking Spatial Justice.Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 2010.

[21]
Dikec M.Justice and the spatial imagination. Environment and Planning A, 2001, 33(10): 1785-1805.

DOI

[22]
Merrett C.Social justice: What is it? Why teach it?. Journal of Geography, 2004, 103: 93-101.The purpose of this article is two-fold. First, the article serves as an introduction to the special issue of the Journal of Geography devoted to teaching social justice. Second, the article serves as an introduction to the concept of social justice, which turns out to be a frustratingly slippery idea to define. Despite this difficulty, I argue that geography teachers must undertake the challenge and then introduce concepts related to social justice and human rights into their curricula. The article asks three basic questions about social justice: What is it? Why should we be concerned about it? Why should we teach it? By drawing on the work of political philosophers, economists, and geographers, I suggest that individualistic notions (equality of opportunity) and community-oriented (equality of outcomes) notions of social justice are complementary rather than in conflict. Moral, economic, political, and legal reasons are offered to justify why we should be concerned about social justice. Finally, I argue that geographers are particularly well suited to study and teach concepts related to social justice because social injustice is caused by and expressed in such intrinsically geographical ways as ghettos, borders, margins, peripheries and regions at different scales.

DOI

[23]
Soja E.Postmetropolis: Critical Studies of Cities and Regions. Oxford: Blackwell, 2000.Edward W. Soja. Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishers, 2000. xx and 440 pp., diags., photos., notes, bib., and name and subject indices. $30.95 paper (ISBN 1-57718-001-1).

DOI

[24]
MacLeod G. From urban entrepreneurialism to a "revanchist city"? On the spatial injustices of Glasgow's renaissance. Antipode, 2002, 34(3): 602-624.

DOI

[25]
Bailey K, Lobenstine L, Nagel K.Spatial justice: A frame for reclaiming our rights to be, thrive, express and connect. The Design Studio for Social Intervention with the Generous Support of the Praxis Project, 2012, 1-21.

[26]
Wagner C.Spatial Justice and the City of Sao Paulo. Lüneburg: Leuphana University, 2011.Not only time has influence on the formation of societies, but also space. People do not only write history, they also produce spaces. And just like history retroacts on social development processes, space forms society. A socially segregated society is controlled through space. The place of residence of a person already determines a big part of its fixed opportunities and conditions. Also, the living location is already suggested by the social class of a person within a capitalist structured society. Those socio-spatial structures lead to an unjust distribution of all kinds of goods, such as the access to basic living conditions, public services, infrastructure, education and work, and psychologically or socially defined restricted spaces. Injustices therefore can only be cured by changing their spatial manifestations.As Brazil is one of the economically uprising and promising BRIC countries, its development involves chances and risks. If unjust conditions remain, its long-term advancement is rather unlikely. The changes within the country are especially visible and present in its principal metropolis: S o Paulo.

[27]
Cutter S.Race, class and environmental justice. Progress in Human Geography, 1995, 19(1): 111-122.

DOI

[28]
Bowen W. Salling M, Haynes K, et al.Toward environmental justice: Spatial equity in ohio and cleveland. Annals of the Association of American Geographers, 1995, 85(4): 641-663.Abstract A growing body of research documents the inequitable impact of environmental hazards on poor and minority communities. This paper uses the United States Environmental Protection Agency's Toxic Release Inventory for 1987鈥1990 and the 1990 Census of Population and Housing to analyze the spatial distribution of toxic industrial pollution and demographic groups in Ohio. In apparent support of the previous body of research, we report high correlations between racial variables and level of toxic release at the county level. The highest levels of toxic release in Ohio occur in the state's most urban counties, fourteen of which contain approximately 90 percent of the state's minority population. However, a census-tract examination of the most urban of these counties, Cuyahoga, reveals no relationships between race and toxicity. The tract-level data do provide some evidence of income-environment inequity, and these findings prompt several methodological advisories for further research. The principal conclusion of the paper is that spatial scale is critical in studies of industrial environmental hazards and environmental justice.

DOI

[29]
Adger W.Scales of governance and environmental justice for adaption and mitigation of climate change. Journal of International Development, 2001, 13(7): 921-931.Abstract Global climate change is a significant challenge to structures of governance at all temporal and spatial scales, particularly in the area of managing natural resources. Advances in understanding of the nature of observed and future climate change has led to a realization that significant future impacts are inevitable and increased efforts towards understanding the process of adaptation to the threatened impacts are required. This paper examines the issue of scale of governance relevant for adaptation. The UN Framework Convention on Climate Change is the primary mechanism for co-ordinating international action on the threat of global climate change. The Convention process perceives adaptation as a further rationale for international transfers, in this case to compensate for and prepare for potential or realised impacts. This approach can be justified by recourse to the idea that enhancing sustainable development will enhance adaptive capacity and that planned activities are a key part of overall adaptation. But many adaptations to climate change will be spontaneous actions to perceived and actual risks in the environment. Thus institutional and economic parameters determine the underlying vulnerability and adaptive capacity of societies. I therefore argue that an understanding of adaptation processes allows interventions and planned adaptations at the most appropriate scales. I illustrate these arguments with reference to adaptation in agriculture and outline the insights from interdisciplinary development studies that can inform the climate change debates. Copyright 2001 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

DOI

[30]
Kurtz H.Scale frames and counter-scale frames: Constructing the problem of environmental injustice. Political Geography, 2003, 22: 887-916.The concept of environmental injustice raises difficult questions about on how best to measure and address environmental inequities across space, and environmental justice politics are permeated by considerable debate over the nature and spatial extent of both problem and possible solutions. This paper theorizes the politics of environmental justice as a politics of scale in order to explore how environmental justice activists respond to the scalar ambiguity inherent in the political concept of environmental justice. With a case study of a controversy over a proposed polyvinylchloride production facility in rural Convent, Louisiana, I develop the concept of scale frames and counter-scale frames as strategic discursive representations of a social grievance that do the work of naming, blaming, and claiming, with meaningful reference to particular geographic scales. The significance of scale is expressed alternatively within these frames as an analytical spatial category, as scales of regulation, as territorial framework(s) for cultural legitimacy, and as a means of inclusion, exclusion and legitimation.

DOI

[31]
Pellow D.The politics of illegal dumping: An environmental justice framework. Qualitative Sociology, 2004, 27(4): 511-525.Studies of the intersection between environmental hazards and community demographics have concluded that environmental inequality is prevalent in communities across the United States. While these studies offer persuasive indicators of environmental inequality, we still have little understanding of the social forces involved in the production of these unequal outcomes. Drawing on a case study of a community of color facing illegal dumping, I propose an environmental justice framework to explain the social dynamics that produced this outcome.

DOI

[32]
Walker G.Beyond distribution and proximity: Exploring the multiple spatialities of environmental justice. Antipode, 2009, 41(4): 614-636.Abstract: Over the last decade the scope of the socio-environmental concerns included within an environmental justice framing has broadened and theoretical understandings of what defines and constitutes environmental injustice have diversified. This paper argues that this substantive and theoretical pluralism has implications for geographical inquiry and analysis, meaning that multiple forms of spatiality are entering our understanding of what it is that substantiates claims of environmental injustice in different contexts. In this light the simple geographies and spatial forms evident in much "first-generation" environmental justice research are proving insufficient. Instead a richer, multidimensional understanding of the different ways in which environmental justice and space are co-constituted is needed. This argument is developed by analysing a diversity of examples of socio-environmental concerns within a framework of three different notions of justice s distribution, recognition and procedure. Implications for the strategies of environmental justice activism for the globalisation of the environmental justice frame and for future geographical research are considered.

DOI

[33]
Kay S, Zhao B, Sui D.Can social media clear the air? A case study of the air pollution problem in Chinese cities. The Professional Geographer, 2015, 67(3): 351-363.Since the U.S. Embassy in Beijing placed an air quality sensor on its roof and began publishing the results on Twitter in 2008, air quality has gained widespread attention on Chinese microblogs. When the Chinese government introduced new air quality standards in 2012, some hailed this as a victory for Chinese microbloggers, signifying the emergence of social media as a democratizing force leading to greater citizen power. Using a representative sample of microblog posts collected from October 2012 to June 2013 on the topic of air pollution, as well as contextual information from a variety of sources, we examine how the government, companies, nongovernmental organizations, and individuals approach the Chinese social media landscape. We find that although microblogs are capable of empowering citizens to advance an environmental cause, social media have also been increasingly employed by the government as a tool for social monitoring and control and by companies as a platform for profiting from air pollution.

DOI

[34]
Esnard A, Gelobter M, Morales X."Environmental justice, GIS and pedagogy". Cartographica: The International Journal for Geographic Information and Geovisualization, 2001, 38(3-4): 53-61.

DOI

[35]
Mantaay J.Mapping environmental injustices: Pitfalls and potential of geographic information systems in assessing environmental health and equity. Environmental Health Perspectives, 2002, l10(2): 161-171.Geographic Information Systems (GIS) have been used increasingly to map instances of environmental injustice, the disproportionate exposure of certain populations to environmental hazards. Some of the technical and analytic difficulties of mapping environmental injustice are outlined in this article, along with suggestions for using GIS to better assess and predict environmental health and equity. I examine 13 GIS-based environmental equity studies conducted within the past decade and use a study of noxious land use locations in the Bronx, New York, to illustrate and evaluate the differences in two common methods of determining exposure extent and the characteristics of proximate populations. Unresolved issues in mapping environmental equity and health include lack of comprehensive hazards databases; the inadequacy of current exposure indices; the need to develop realistic methodologies for determining the geographic extent of exposure and the characteristics of the affected populations; and the paucity and insufficiency of health assessment data. GIS have great potential to help us understand the spatial relationship between pollution and health. Refinements in exposure indices; the use of dispersion modeling and advanced proximity analysis; the application of neighborhood-scale analysis; and the consideration of other factors such as zoning and planning policies will enable more conclusive findings. The environmental equity studies reviewed in this article found a disproportionate environmental burden based on race and/or income. It is critical now to demonstrate correspondence between environmental burdens and adverse health impacts-to show the disproportionate effects of pollution rather than just the disproportionate distribution of pollution sources.

DOI PMID

[36]
Most M, Sengupta R, Burgener M A.Spatial scale and population assignment choices in environmental justice analyses. The Professional Geographer, 2004, 56(4): 574-586.Environmental justice laws protect certain populations against discriminatory actions that may result from a myriad of enterprises,including transportation activities. Previous environmental equity studies examining the effects of transportation-engendered externalities have been criticized on several points,including (1) that the choice of a reference population for comparison to the criterion variable may influence the outcome of research results and (2) that the selection and use of inappropriate methodologies intended to identify and characterize populations may foreordain research outcomes. This article examines the potentially confounding effects of selected spatial scale and population assignment strategies as applied to a study of excessive noise levels at a large Midwestern airport,finding that reported outcomes can vary significantly as a function of methodological choices.

DOI

[37]
Holifield R, Michael P, Gordon W.Introduction spaces of environmental justice: Frameworks for critical engagement. Antipode, 2009, 41(4): 591-612.This paper describes the building of a new open static "output-output" (O-O) model in comparison to the open static input-ouput (I-O) model developed by Leontief (Rev Econ Stat 18:105-125, 1936). While the I-O model can be characterized as a system that relates final demand to gross output, the O-O model relates gross output for final demand (endogenous or exogenous) to gross output for output (endogenous). We perform a comparative analysis between the two models in structure and characteristics and illustrate the usefulness of the O-O model, for example, by formulating I-O multipliers that can accept output as an initial change. The comprehensive analysis conducted in this paper, including a numerical illustration with an example, shows that the two models form a mutually supplementary relationship and could give rise to a fundamental framework for the analyses of various regional and national economic activities.

DOI

[38]
Bickerstaff K, Agyeman J.Assembling justice spaces: The scalar politics of environmental justice in North-east England. Antipode, 2009, 41(4): 781-806.Abstract: In contrast to the US environmental justice movement, which has been successful in building a networked environmentalism that recognises—and has impacted upon—national patterns of distributional (in)equalities, campaigns in the UK have rarely developed beyond the local or articulated a coherent programme of action that links to wider socio-spatial justice issues or effects real changes in the regulatory or political environment. Our purpose in this paper is to extend research which explores the spatial politics of mobilisation, by attending to the multi-scalar dynamics embedded in the enactment of environmental justice (EJ) in north-east England. It is an approach that is indebted to recent work on the scalar politics of EJ, and also to the network ideas associated with actor-network theory (ANT)-inspired research on human–nature relations. Our account provides preliminary reflections on the potential for an "assemblage" perspective which draws together people, texts, machines, animals, devices and discourses in relations that collectively constitute—and scale—EJ. To conclude, and building upon this approach, we suggest future research avenues that we believe present a promising agenda for critical engagement with the production, scaling and politics of environmental (in)justice.

DOI

[39]
Buckingham S, Rakibe K.Gendered geographies of environmental injustice. Antipode, 2009, 41(4): 659-683.Abstract: As environmental justice concerns become more widely embedded in environmental organizations and policymaking, and increasingly the focus of academic study, the gender dimension dissolves into an exclusive focus on race/ethnicity and class/income. While grassroots campaigning activities were often dominated by women, in the more institutionalized activities of organizations dominated by salaried professionals, gender inequality is neglected as a vector of environmental injustice, and addressing this inequality is not considered a strategy for redress. This paper explores some of the reasons why this may be so, which include a lack of visibility of gendered environmental injustice; professional campaigning organizations which are themselves gender blind; institutions at a range of scales which are still structured by gender (as well as class and race) inequalities; and an intellectual academy which continues to marginalize the study of gender nd women's nequality. The authors draw on experience of environmental activism, participant observation, and other qualitative research into the gendering of environmental activity, to first explore the constructions of scale to see how this might limit a gender-fair approach to environmental justice. Following this, the practice of "gender mainstreaming" in environmental organizations and institutions will be examined, demonstrating how this is limited in scope and fails to impact on the gendering of environmental injustice.

DOI

[40]
哈维. 社会正义、后现代主义与城市. 朱康译. 见罗岗. 帝国、都市与现代性. 南京: 江苏人民出版社, 2006.

[Harvey David. Social Justice, Postmodernism and Cities. Translated by Zhu Kang In: Luo Gang. Empire, Cosmopolis and Modernity. Nanjing: Jiangshu People's Press, 2006.]

[41]
任平. 空间的正义: 当代中国可持续城市化的基本走向. 城市发展研究, 2006, 13(5): 1-4.所谓空间正义，就是在空间生产和空间资源配置中的社会正义。进入高速城市化阶段的中国，空间 生产与空间资源成为资本逐利、公民空间权益、政府制度设计三方博弈的主要战场。以资本为核心、以利润率最大化为导向、以地方政府片面的GDP追求及与资本 利益共谋为特征、以制度公正相对缺失为条件的空间生产，必然多重损害公众的空间权益，缺乏“空间正义”，进而带来了大量的问题，呼唤学者去加以思考。本文 从政治哲学角度对此做了新的探索，希望引起学界的关注。

DOI

[Ren Ping.Space justice: Contemporary China towards the sustainable urbanization. Urban Studies, 2006, 13(5): 1-4.]

[42]
钱振明. 走向空间正义: 让城市化的增益惠及所有人. 江海学刊, 2007, (2): 40-43.城市化的过程就是城市空间的生产过程。空间的生产应当符合空间的正义。中国的城市化，存在着以牺牲和剥夺某些地区的利益和某些社会成员的权利为代价，导致城乡之间和地区之间的发展差异、行业之间和社会成员之间的收入差距愈益加大的失误，从而使城乡关系的和谐、社会的秩序和城市化的持续发展失去了基础，因而是一种侵害“空间正义原则”的空间生产。中国需要走符合空间正义原则的新城市化道路，让城市化的增益惠及所有人。符合空间正义的新城市化，需要相应的政策支持和制度基础。

DOI

[Qian Zhenming.Space justice: Everyone enjoys the fruit of urbanization. Jianghai Academic Journal, 2007, (2): 40-43.]

[43]
陈忠. 空间辩证法、空间正义与集体行动的逻辑. 哲学动态, 2010, (6): 40-46.进入新世纪以来，随着我国城市化水平的提升，城市化进程的加快，与之相关的空间问题逐渐成为人们关注与谈论最多的话题之一。2008年，世界性的金融危机由美国房地产次贷危机所引发，2009年，房地产对我国经济增长的巨大贡献及社会各界对我国房地产过热、房价过高、住宅正义等问题的持续、集中关注，则更把空间问题推到了理论前台。

[Chen Zhong.Spatial dialectics, Spatial justice and the logic of collective action. Philosophical Trends, 2010, (6): 40-46.]

[44]
董慧. 空间、生态与正义的辩证法: 大卫·哈维的生态正义思想. 哲学研究, 2011, (8): 36-41.正生态正义思想是哈维的马克思主义理论的重要组成部分,在新马克思主义及西方地理学马克思主义中都占有独特的地位。哈维从马克思的某些基本立场和方法出发,将正义问题置于更为广泛的讨论中:他在坚持空间研究的基础上,在自然与环境、时空及场所、认同与差异等关系中讨论生态正义问

[Dong Hui.Dialectics of space, ecology and justice: On David Harvey's thought of ecological justice. Philosophical Researches, 2011, (8): 36-41.]

[45]
李晓乐, 王英, 王志刚. 环境—正义—阶级: 略论戴维·哈维的空间正义思想. 自然辩证法研究, 2012, 28(11): 54-58.

[Li Xiaole, Wang Ying, Wang Zhigang.Environment-justice-class: On David Harvey's thought of spatial justice. Studies in Dialectics of Nature, 2012, 28(11): 54-58.]

[46]
曹现强, 张福磊. 空间正义形成、内涵及意义. 城市发展研究, 2011, 18(4): 1-5.社会科学的“空间转向”、新社会运动的发展以及多个学科不同路径的研究共同开启和推动了关于“空间正义”的思考。在众多学者研究的基础上，本文从空间和正义两个角度对“空间正义”概念进行了阐释。“空间正义”不仅是正义在空间的表现，而且植根于空间和空间生产的过程，受空间所强化的支配和压制的影响。为使其更具政策意义，本文较为详尽地分析了“空间正义”的具体内涵，．“空间正义”不仅丰富了正义理论，推动了消除空间不公的社会行动，并且为许多相关社会议题提供了新的理论解释，更重要的是它对认识和解决中国城市问题有着很强的现实意义。

DOI

[Cao Xianqiang, Zhang Fulei.Spatial justice: Context, development and connotation. Urban Studies, 2011, 18(4): 1-5.]

[47]
王兴中. 中国城市生活空间结构研究. 北京: 科学出版社, 2004.

[Wang Xingzhong.China's Urban Living Space Structure Research. Beijing: Science Press, 2004.]

[48]
王兴中. 城市社区体系规划原理. 北京: 科学出版社, 2012.

[Wang Xingzhong.The Planning Principle of Urban Community System. Beijing: Science Press, 2012.]

[49]
王兴中, 常芳. 空间公正思潮下的区域同步发展观: 我的新区域主义思考. 地域研究与开发, 2013, 32(6): 1-6.20世纪70年代以来，发达国家相继进入后工业化阶段，他们面临着不同区域社会与工业化水平和谐关系的可持续发展问题。这些问题都预示着人文主义应该有新的价值观念来指导和解决上述问题的困境。由此，引发了社会科学的大讨论。在被学者公认或公议的“正义论”哲学思想启示下，很多学科都提出了系统的社会理念。区域学科借助社会理念也相继提出了对应的构建“新区域”的“社会空间”建构理念。由于这些学科固有的经济（学原理）导向下的生态持续与社会持续观，很难耦合到社会空间公正价值观的新发展趋势。对于中国区域发展来讲，以社会平等价值为导向的区域公正发展已逐渐成为当前的主要空间矛盾。为此，从新人文地理学人-地和谐思想出发，提出了人本空间公正理念下的区域间同步发展观点。

DOI

[Wang Xingzhong, Chang Fang.Spatial justice thinking of the concept of regional synchronous development view: My thinking to new regionalism. Areal Research and Development, 2013, 32(6): 1-6.]

[50]
常芳, 王兴中, 王锴, 等. 对新城市主义社区空间规划价值理念的审视. 现代城市研究, 2013, (12): 16-21.城市规划的新城市主义理念是伴随着解决工业化后城市物质功能空间问题而逐渐成熟的,自此形成了以城市社区为单元的人居性规划与设计原理。20多年来,全球化与消费文化中人权问题的消长、城市空间人本公正问题日益凸显,促使社会公平的人本价值观问题成为城市空间的核心矛盾,反映出在社会空间层面新城市主义缺少如何构建良好社区的探讨。本文从人本主义城市(社会)生活空间质量观的视角来审视新城市主义社区规划的空间价值观,系统地从空间价值观的角度对其人本性、技术性与实践性理念进行审视。

DOI

[Chang Fang, Wang Xingzhong, Wang Kai, et al.Survey of the value of new urbanism community spatial planning. Modern Urban Research, 2013, (12): 16-21.]

[51]
陆大道, 姚士谋, 刘慧, 等. 2006中国区域发展报告: 城镇化进程及空间扩张. 北京: 商务印书馆, 2007.

[Lu Dadao, Yao Shimou, Liu Hui, et al.2006 China Regional Development Report: Urbanization and Spatial Sprawl. Beijing: Commercial Press, 2007.]

[52]
马学广, 王爱民, 闫小培. 权力视角下的城市空间资源配置研究. 规划师, 2008, 24(1): 77-82.空间是权力的隐喻和象征，空间的塑造遵循着权力的逻辑。城市空间资源的配置不仅是计划调控或市场调节的过程，更是一个权力运作的过程。我国当前的城市空间资源配置虽以代议制民主的权力格局和日趋成熟的法团主义权力格局为主体，但仍存在着公共利益难以表达、公共空间被异化，以及城市规划成为支配性权力组织用以维护和扩大其利益的工具等问题。

DOI

[Ma Xueguang, Wang Aimin, Yan Xiaopei.Study on urban spatial resources configuration: A view point of power. Planners, 2008, 24(1): 77-82.]

[53]
刘玉亭. 转型期中国城市贫困的社会空间. 北京: 科学出版社, 2005.

[Liu Yuting.Chinese New Urban Poverty and Its Spatiality under Market Transition. Beijing: Science Press, 2005.]

[54]
袁媛, 吴缚龙, 许学强. 转型期中国城市贫困和剥夺的空间模式. 地理学报, 2009, 64(6): 753-763.利用普查数据、民政数据和问卷调查资料,从城市宏观空间与个体微观层面,系统检测了转型时期中国城市贫困和城市剥夺的空间模式及形成原因.研究发现:城市贫困和剥夺具有在内城区重合、外围区分离的特点.内城居住区的户籍贫困人口在住房、教育、设施等多方面处于被剥夺状况,外围的企业配套区户籍贫困人口则没有很明显的被剥夺状况,外来人口聚居区的低收入和贫困农民工处于被剥夺状况.究其原因,计划经济时代和转型时期的城市住房、建设和更新等空间政策的共同作用,直接导致了户籍贫困人口和农民工生活状况的差异,进而产生了迥异于西方城市特征的中国城市贫困和剥夺的空间模式.

DOI

[Yuan Yuan, Wu Fulong, Xu Xueqiang.The spatial pattern of poverty and deprivation in transitional Chinese city: Analysis of area-based indicators and individual data. Acta Geographica Sinica, 2009, 64(6): 753-763.]

[55]
黄耿志, 薛德升. 1990年以来广州市摊贩空间政治的规训机制. 地理学报, 2011, 66(8): 1063-1075.近年来,针对某些群体的复仇型或后公正空间政治成为西方城市地理学理解20世纪80年代以来城市转型的重要理论。现有的研究注意到了这种空间政治嵌入地方的多样形态,但对其内含的对立性缺乏研究。中国社会转型过程中发生的现实空间矛盾为开展我国背景下的公共空间政治研究提供了源泉。本文基于列菲弗尔的基本空间理论,采用结构—能动的分析路径,运用宏观的政策和制度分析与对典型案例的观察、半结构式访谈、深度访谈相结合的综合方法,以摊贩现象为切入点对90年代以来广州城市空间政治进行了研究。研究表明,一种排斥性公共空间政治内在地包含了由结构性的规训与能动性的反规训构成的对立性,这一特性在广州表现为:①对摊贩的排斥性空间政治是作为解决发展的潜在危机而实施综合环境改善战略的组成部分而产生,并导致一种更为明显的"全景敞视主义"式规训机制的形成。②对立的空间通过摊贩日常式的伺机而动和温顺的不遵守与插曲式的个体暴力和集体行动而形成,结果战略空间被重构为以维持个体生存、摆脱贫困和追求自由为目的的工具空间。这种对立性在根源上是一种社会产物,而产生的实际冲突状况则将取决于空间发展观念及规训策略与反规训力量两者之间的对抗或协调程度。

DOI

[Huang Gengzhi, Xue Desheng.Discipline and anti-discipline: Spatial politics of urban street vending in Guangzhou since the 1990s. Acta Geographica Sinica, 2011, 66(8): 1063-1075.]

[56]
李志刚, 顾朝林. 中国城市社会空间结构转型. 南京: 东南大学出版社, 2011.

[Li Zhigang, Gu Chaolin.Social Spatial Structure Transformation in Chinese Cities. Nanjing: Southeast University Press, 2011.]

[57]
刘云刚, 王丰龙. 城乡结合部的空间生产与黑色集群: 广州M垃圾猪场的案例研究. 地理科学, 2011, 31(5): 563-569.空间的生产是当今西方的主流社会理论之一,也在逐渐成为解释中国城市空间开发现象的有效工具。但是,目前国内对空间生产理论的运用主要集中于资本和政府作用下的"强"空间生产。通过对广州M垃圾猪场的案例研究,探讨了制度结构和社会行动等宏微观要素对城乡结合部空间生产的综合作用,并展示了一个由农村进城移民所发起的"弱"空间生产案例。农村进城移民通过积极的区位战略、社会经营网络的营造实现了空间的占据和空间的生产,其背后则折射了户籍、土地、卫生等诸多转型期的制度漏洞。空间生产的结果是一个以农村进城移民为主体的产业和生活单元,即黑色集群的形成,该集群具有非正规乃至非法特征,在城市管理者的制度挤压下呈现发展的不稳定性。研究结果表明,对此类空间的治理必须首先基于综合的理解,而不是取缔或粗暴管制。

[Liu Yungang, Wang Fenglong.Production of space and the black cluster in the urban-rural frontier: A case study of M garbage pig farm in Guangzhou city. Scientia Geographica Sinica, 2011, 31(5): 563-569.]

[58]
李开宇, 李九全, 王锴. 基于城市社会地理学视角的农民工城镇化研究. 人文地理, 2011, 26(5): 39-42.农民工深度城镇化成为我国城市化发展、经济增长转型、社会稳定和可持续发展的重大课题。在总结、梳理国内外农民工城乡迁移与城镇化研究成果的基础上,认为在我国城市化转型发展背景下,基于城市社会地理学视角,以农民工城镇化进程中的个体微观行为特征研究为基础,研究农民工在区域认知、城镇化意愿与行为特征、城镇化格局与过程规律,建立农民工城镇化空间模型,可以揭示农民工个体微观行为下的城镇化进程与区域城镇体系规划的耦合关系;从城市生活空间与社会空间特征评价不同空间与行为模式下的农民工城镇化效率,可以提出效率导向下的农民工城镇化的空间结构与引导规划;基于空间公正理念,从城市公共产品与服务政策、资源可获性的城市社区规划等方面的创新,可以促进农民工公平、公正、有序、有尊严的城镇化进程。

[Li Kaiyu, Li Jiuquan, Wang Kai.A study on the urbanization of migrantg workers based on urban social geography. Human Geography, 2011, 26(5): 39-42.]

[59]
张京祥, 吴缚龙, 马润潮. 体制转型与中国城市空间重构: 建立一种空间演化的制度分析框架. 城市规划, 2008, 32(6): 55-60.建立了转型期中国城市空间重构的一个制度分析框架，揭示了体制转型的基本特征及城市空间重构的基本方面，并重点评析了政府企业化治理、城市增长机器、二元规制环境等对城市空间重构的重要影响。

DOI

[Zhang Jingxiang, Wu Fulong, Ma Ruichao.Institutional transition and reconstruction of China's urban space: Establishing a institutional analysis structure for spatial evolution. City Planning Review, 2008, 32(6): 55-60.]

[60]
杨永春, 李欣珏. 中国城市资本密度空间变化与机制: 以兰州市为例. 地理研究, 2009, 28(4): 933-946.构建了计划经济时期和转轨期中 国城市资本密度空间分布的理论模型,并与市场经济体制的同类模型了对比研究,以兰州市为例,利用高精度卫星影像和大规模实地调查方法获取数据,采用GIS 和数理统计方法,利用容积率指标,分区、分行业进行了实证研究。结果表明:市场经济体制、计划经济体制和转轨期中国城市资本密度由中心到外围的空间变化规 律并不相同,而后者居于前两者之间,存在向市场经济空间模型靠近的趋势;计划经济体制、转轨期的中国城市土地利用由中心到外围为商务→住宅→工业→农业模 式;转轨期容积率比计划经济时期均有不同程度提高,住宅、商务等建筑容积率的空间分布模型更接近市场经济体制下的模型;住宅、商务、工业等建筑容积率依次 递减在一定程度上解释了住宅、商务用地的向心分布和工业用地外迁的现象。

DOI

[Yang Yongchun, Li Xinjue.The spatial change of urban capital density and its mechanism in China: A case study of Lanzhou. Geographical Research, 2009, 28(4): 933-946.]

[61]
Zhu H, Chen X, Qian J.Charting the development of social and cultural geography in Mainland China: Voices from the inside and the possibility of international dialogues. Social & Cultural Geography, 2014, 15(3): 255-283.

[62]
安宁, 朱竑. 美国《时代》杂志对中国的地理想象: 基于东方主义视角的研究, 地理学报, 2013, 68(12): 1702-1713.伴随着信息社会的到来，媒体如何反映人地关系逐渐成为人文地理研究的热门话题。20世纪70年代以来，以Said为代表的西方学者开启了“想象地理”的大门，将后殖民主义研究与地缘政治等地理话题结合起来。本研究援引“东方主义”理论，采用文本分析方法深入剖析美国《时代》杂志对中国地方知识的生产和传播过程，探讨西方是如何通过其话语体系想象和重塑东方世界的。研究的主要结论如下：①《时代》杂志作为全球地方知识生产和传播的重要场所，建构了中国的国家身份，生产了中国的消极地方知识，并通过读者阅读的过程将其传播；②在中美既有的二元差异基础之上，《时代》杂志话语权力建构了一种东、西方二元对立的话语策略，将中国与美国分别表述成为落后与先进的形象，并为其政治意图服务；③中国作为一个特殊的“东方”文本被西方的话语霸权想象、解构和重构。研究弥补了Said东方学研究在地理学上的缺陷，从想象地理的角度为国家形象的研究注入新的元素，并对我国国家形象的建构以及更加清楚地认识中美关系等提供具有价值的参考意见。

DOI

[An Ning, Zhu Hong.American magazine TIME's geographical imaginations of China: A case study on the perspective of orientalism. Acta Geographica Sinica, 2013, 68(12): 1702-1713.]

[63]
魏开, 许学强. 城市空间生产批判: 新马克思主义空间研究范式述评. 城市问题, 2009, (4): 77-82.20世纪60年代后,在西方发达国家出现了基于新马克思主义思想的空间研究热潮。这一研究最重要的特点是将马克思学说引入空间研究领域并发展成为一种新的研究范式。从其空间批判的基本立场、历史唯物主义的主要视角、城市与城市化的核心内容、超学科的学术特征四个方面对其进行了述评。

[Wei Kai, Xu Xueqiang.Critique of urban spatial production: Commentary on Neo-Marxism spatial paradigm. Urban Problems, 2009, (4): 77-82.]

[64]
吕拉昌. “城市空间转向”与新城市地理研究. 世界地理研究, 2008, 17(1): 32-38.在全球化与信息技术革命以及经济地理学的复式转向的推动下,"城市空间转向"已成为事实,城市地理研究不仅需要对物质空间进行研究,更要对人文空间及文化空间等进行研究,其研究的视点是城市空间的主观性与客观性的融合,顺应这种转变,开展新城市地理研究就成为必然.

DOI

[Lyu Lachang.Urban space turn and new urban geography. World Geographical Studies, 2008, 17(1): 32-38.]

[65]
柴彦威. 城市地理学思想与方法. 北京: 科学出版社, 2012.

[Chai Yanwei.Thoughts and Methods on Urban Geography. Beijing: Science Press, 2012.]

[66]
中国地理学会城市地理专业委员会. 中国城市地理学的传承与发展. 地理研究, 2017, 36(11): 2029-2046.改革开放近40年来,中国城市地理学发展有以下几个显著特点:(1)密切结合城市规划实践,以城市规划需求为目标导向;(2)建立了引进、吸收和转换的机制;(3)积极推进城镇化研究的国际合作;(4)以全球视野促进中国城市地理理论研究与西方的接轨;(5)结合中国社会发展的新形势,强化对生态环境问题和以人为本发展理念的关注,促进了很多分支学科的发展。中青年城市地理学者在西方城市地理学发展新趋势、城市产业演化、城市空间结构演化、城镇化格局的重塑、中国发展模式的新解释、大数据的应用、定性方法的创新等方面做出了探讨。未来的中国城市地理研究,应该继续强调服务于城市规划实践;吸收其他学科优势,总结中国城市发展规律;城市地理学者应当掌握对国家城市方针政策和重大战略的话语权;继续加大国际合作研究力度,提高在国际学术界的地位。

DOI

[Professional Commission of Urban Geography, The Geographical Society of China. The inheritance and development of Chinese urban geography. Geographical Research, 2017, 36(11): 2029-2046.]

[67]
薛德升, 王立. 1978年以来中国城市地理研究进展. 地理学报, 2014, 69(8): 1117-1129.以国内出版的专著和重要学术期刊发表的学术论文为资料基础，运用文献计量学方法，对1978年改革开放30多年来中国城市地理的研究进展进行了总结。研究发现：中国城市地理研究总体上日益繁荣，研究内容不断拓展和深化，研究方法逐步走向“科学化”和“规范化”，研究的空间尺度总体上“由大向小”转变，研究视角向多样化转变；国家政策和城市热点问题对研究内容具有重要影响，西方理论和流派对研究视角具有重要影响；基础研究与应用研究并重是重要特色，城市化与城市体系是重要的研究主题。建议在未来的研究中培养全球化视野，批判性地引进西方理论，加强理论创新、科学规范、跨学科交叉与新方法引进。

DOI

[Xue Desheng, Wang Li.Progress of urban geography research in China since the 1980s. Acta Geographica Sinica, 2014, 69(8): 1117-1129.]

[68]
陈明星, 龚颖华. 城镇化系列咨询研究进展与影响. 地理研究, 2016, 35(11): 2015-2024.2014年3月,国家印发《新型城镇化规划(2014-2020年)》,标志着中国城镇化发展的重大转型,将城镇化重点转向实现“人的城镇化”.国家城镇化政策转型离不开多学科众多学者长期以来针对城镇化开展研究探索的集体智慧的推动,中国科学院学部牵头完成的城镇化系列咨询报告是标志性成果之一,在城镇化政策转型中发挥了作用.回顾城镇化系列咨询研究的主要内容,以及对国家相关部委产生的工作推动与影响.认为人文与经济地理学要积极承担国家智库和思想库功能,加强基础研究以支撑决策咨询研究,城镇化是地理学综合研究的重要内容,新型城镇化为学科发展提供了广阔空间.同时,科技工作者要有强烈责任感与科学精神.

DOI

[Chen Mingxing, Gong Yinghua.Research progress and influence of series of consulting reports of urbanization. Geographical Research, 2016, 35(11): 2015-2024.]

[69]
刘小平, 黎夏, 陈逸敏, 等. 基于多智能体的居住区位空间选择模型. 地理学报, 2010, 65(6): 695-707.多智能体系统(Multi-Agent system,MAS)是一种进行复杂系统分析与模拟的强有力工具,尤其在社会科学领域得到了广泛的应用。本文提出了基于多智能体的居住区位选择模型(Agent-Based Model of Residential Location—ABMRL),将多智能体建模的方法应用于居民居住区位决策行为和地价动态变化的研究中,旨在探索与模拟居民在居住选择过程中的复杂空间决策行为,以及居民之间、居民与地理环境的相互作用而导致城市居住空间分异的演化过程。ABMRL模型由表征各类居民的多智能体层和表征地理环境的元胞自动层组成,对应人地关系中的两个基本要素——人类与自然环境。该模型认为居民迁居的动力源于内部的经济社会压力和外部的居住环境刺激。利用ABMRL模型模拟和验证了居住空间分异、圈层城市空间结构、城市绅士化等经典城市理论,并以广州市海珠区为实验区,模拟了该区域居民居住空间分异的演化过程和地价的动态变化。

DOI

[Liu Xiaoping, Li Xia, Chen Yimin, et al.Agent-based model of residential location. Acta Geographica Sinica, 2010, 65(6): 695-707.]

[70]
陶海燕, 黎夏, 陈晓翔, 等. 基于多智能体的地理空间分异现象模拟: 以城市居住空间演变为例. 地理学报, 2007, 62(6): 579-588.许多地理现象都存在一定的空间分异规律.研究地理空间分异现象的形成与发展有重要的理论意 义.基于“从上至下”的方程式方法很难对这些现象的形成过程进行解析.采用“自下而上”的多智能体系统,对复杂地理现象的分异过程进行了重现.采用 java-swarm仿真技术,以城市居住空间分异现象为例,模拟出城市系统从无序走向有序的过程,为发展和验证城市理论提供了一种重要的分析手段.基于 多智能体的居住空间分异模型展现了居民智能体聚集现象的产生过程及对房屋价值的影响,比较了居民不同收入差异情况下对居住空间分异的影响.模拟结果表明居 住空间分异现象是一个历史的必然;收入差异扩大使中低收入阶层在居住的空间区位选择上处于被动地位.

DOI

[Tao Haiyan, Li Xia, Chen Xiaoxiang, et al.Method exploration of geographical spatial differentiation based on multi-agent: A case study of urban residential simulations. Acta Geographica Sinica, 2007, 62(6): 579-588.]

[71]
张鸿辉, 曾永年, 金晓斌, 等. 多智能体城市土地扩张模型及其应用. 地理学报, 2008, 63(8): 869-881.传统的城市土地扩张模型多为静态模型,无法呈现空间上每一时间点的土地利用状况,以元胞自动机(Cellular Automata)模型为代表的新型城市土地扩张模型虽然具有动态特性,但其无法描述影响城市土地扩张的智能体(Agent)之间所产生的多元变化结果。以多智能体系统(Multi-Agent System)理论为基础,建立城市土地资源时间和空间配置规则,构建了动态且能描述影响城市土地扩张的智能体(Agent)间互动关系的城市土地扩张模型,并以长沙市区为例,应用所构建之模型进行了城市土地扩张的实证分析。结果表明:该模型可以反映城市土地扩张的基本特征和规律,对于解释城市土地扩张的成因、理解智能体行为对城市土地扩张过程的影响是合适的。并且将模拟结果与遥感土地利用解译结果对比,1998年、2001年、2005年城市土地扩张模拟的点对点精度均达到68%以上,从而能够为政府和城市规划者制定用地政策提供辅助决策支持。

DOI

[Zhang Honghui, Zeng Yongnian, Jin Xiaobin, et al.Urban land expansion model based on multi-agent system and application. Acta Geographica Sinica, 2008, 63(8): 869-881.]

[72]
陈明星, 叶超, 付承伟. 我国城市化水平研究的回顾与思考. 城市规划学刊, 2007, (6): 54-59.回顾了城市化水平研究的滞后派、基本协调派、隐性超城市化派的主要观点。文献梳理分析的基础上得出两点认识:①城市化水平比较研究的数值结果仅有借鉴意义,不可生搬硬套;②中国城市化及其研究都具有演变特征。研究表明目前的城市化水平问题面临四个困境:研究困境、认识困境、政策困境、实践困境。借鉴系统健康理论、人类发展指数评价,基于"人"的角度,量化"人"的发展,构建城市化的健康发展的综合评价体系为人们提供了新的视角;同时,应注意到我国城市化进程有着极为显著的地域差异,可能是我国城市化水平下一阶段研究最迫切需要解决的两大议题。

DOI

[Chen Mingxing, Ye Chao, Fu Chengwei.Urbanization level in China: A retrospect and consideration. Urban Planning Forum, 2007, (6): 54-59.]

[73]
陈明星, 叶超. 健康城市化: 新的发展理念及其政策含义. 人文地理, 2011, 26(2): 56-61.我国城市化已进入一个新阶段,高速推进的城市化面临许多突出问题。在研究和政策方面也陷入困境,对未来城市化发展取向和道路认识不一。本文提出健康城市化的发展理念。它有3个理论来源:健康观的演变与系统健康科学的兴起,发展观的演变与人类发展指数评价,人地关系演变与可持续发展理论。在归纳其对健康城市化的启示的基础上,界定了健康城市化的概念,明确提出三个内涵:人的发展、城乡互动、资源环境,并与传统城市化进行比较。相应的政策含义是:资源环境是城市化的基础,城乡协调和互动是城市化的关键环节,"人的发展"是城市化的出发点与最终目标。

[Chen Mingxing, Ye Chao.Healthy urbanization: A new conception and policy explanation. Human Geography, 2011, 26(2): 56-61.]

Options
文章导航

/

〈 〉