曹妃甸生态城指标体系.doc

.曹妃甸生态城指标体系 THE INDICATOR SYSTEM FOR CAOFEIDIAN ECO-CITY卡塔琳娜舒伯格/Katarina Schylberg谭英译/Translated by TAN Ying摘要：曹妃甸国际生态城的指标体系将指导和支持生态城的规划与设计、建造与运营，从而实现其整体愿景。指标体系建立在“共生城市”的综合性和多学科的方法基础之上。指标是一种有益的工具，从不同层次积极地整合规划中提议的各种目标，而且可以用来跟踪和控制目标实现的情况。指标系统还是专业人员、政府人员及公众之间进行沟通的工具，以明确曹妃甸国际生态城的特殊挑战以及对策。文章介绍了建议的指标体系，包括部分精选的关键指标，以及一些理论和方法问题。 Abstract: The Indicator System of Caofeidian International Eco-city will guide and support the process of planning and design, production and operating the Eco-city to fulfil the overall vision. The indicator system is based on the SymbioCity integrated and multidisciplinary approach. Indicator are used as tools for actively integrating goals in planning proposals on different levels but also for follow-up and control of how the goals have been fulfilled. Indicators are also important tools to communicate to politicians and the general public the special challenges in realizing the Caofeidian International Eco-city and solutions to these challenges. The article describes the proposed indicator system including a few selected key indicators as well as some theoretical and methodological questions.关键词：指标，规划指标，生态城，共生城市，可持续发展评估 Key words: Indicators, Planning indicators, Eco-city. SymbioCity, Sustainability review曹妃甸国际生态城指标体系是指导生态城的规划、设计、建设和管理的支撑系统，从而实现其整体愿景，即成为响誉世界的“以人为本、社会进步、经济繁荣、气候中性、环境可持续发展”的新城。这些指标也从整体性视角支持城市的可持续发展，包括环境/生态、社会经济、文化和空间目标。这意味着每一个指标都是一种有益的工具，从不同层次积极地整合这些规划中提出的目标，而且可以用来跟踪和控制目标实现的情况。这些指标也是项目的利益相关者内部交流以及对外交流的重要部分。指标系统还是专业人员、政府人员及公众进行沟通的工具，以明确曹妃甸国际生态城的特殊挑战以及对策。指标体系包括两种类型的指标：规划指标和管理指标。在目前的规划阶段，规划指标是重点。规划指标的概念，作为进行综合空间规划时实现环境目标的一种工具，在1990年代后期引入瑞典城市规划领域。在过去的10年中，规划指标一直是由政府资助的各种研发项目的课题，但是还没有成为普遍的规划实践。规划指标是对通常基于统计信息的管理性指标的补充。管理指标提供关于现状和过去的信息，而不是未来的情况。规划指标的重要战略意义，在于它作为一种工具，有助于在规划过程的早期阶段探讨未来的结果。通过对规划的情况进行解读，直接或间接地得出的结论，规划指标可以描述能够从空间规划收集到的各种因素。曹妃甸生态城所选择的规划指标借鉴了瑞典在规划理论和实践方面的最新发展，并适当调整以适应曹妃甸生态城所面临的具体挑战。1.以“共生城市”方法为基础的指标体系指标体系建立在共生城市的综合性和多学科的方法基础之上，这意味着共生城市模式可以用一个概念模型来表达，这一模型有助于理解可持续的现代化城市的基本原则。在这里，指标体系的概念生成是源于将“共生城市”的概念方法结合曹妃甸的具体条件和规划目标，或者反过来，在共生城市概念模型下界定当地的条件和规划目标。概念生成的含义是阐明分析所基于的理论基石，并指出战略和政治角度的基本条件。该框架还提供了用于组织指标的分析性结构和鉴定并选择指标的逻辑基础。 2.“共生城市”的概念模型“共生城市”理念和方法的概念模型可以通过图示来说明。在图上的内环中包括了诸如气候变化、自然灾害和人为灾害等环境因素，次环则代表改善环境状况所必须考虑的若干子系统（图1，2）。这些子系统包括城市功能的发展和管理，例如工业、居住和服务，此外还有交通运输规划和管理，能源、废弃物和水的规划和管理、景观规划以及建设规划与设计。这些子系统可以在整个城市或局部城区进行分析和发展。外环代表了为实现长期变化必须考虑的体制因素。广义的体制因素包括城市管理、城市规划的编制办法、土地管理、法律和政策、公共和私人投资的管理、私营机构的参与、培训和技术等。基于概念模型的规划和管理指标如下（图3）： 3 管理指标往往与环境和社会经济目标联系紧密，而规划指标往往与空间目标和子系统的目标和标准联系紧密。/As illustrated in the diagram there are often strong and direct links between monitoring indicators and environmental and socio-economic goals and planning indicators and For each subsystem there are specific aspects reflecting spatial environmental, social, cultural and economic goals. A filled circle indicates a strong and direct link between goals and subsystems and indicators. A circle without filling indicates a weaker or indirect link.spatial goals and objectives and targets on subsystem level.4 每个子系统中都体现环境、社会、文化、经济因素的特定方面。下表中圆点表示紧密、直接的联系，圆圈表示较弱的、不直接的联系。/ 规划指标在第三圈层中所表达的城市环境和技术子系统层面形成，具体建议一定的城市物质空间品质或预计达到的效果。城市规划和建设的整合解决方案和技术措施也在这个层面形成。管理指标与第二圈层的环境或社会经济主要因素相关，用于监控社会发展过程中社会经济和环境方面的达标情况。这些目标可以是国际性的、国家性的、区域性的或城市的。基于共生城市理念，在子系统层面界定位和概括指标。围绕各个子系统组织指标有利于使用这些指标评价和判断建议的技术系统和措施，推进工作的进程。（子系统指不同的规划方面，例如能够界定的次级层面的城市功能方面或交通运输方面等。）共生城市理念倡导整合、可持续的城市发展，在城市功能和各个技术系统之间发现共生协同关系。所达到的循环系统既提高效率又达到最好的经济效益，并节约自然资源。在这一综合方法的基础上，规划指标的形成还基于从全局或多层次视角看待可持续城市发展问题的一系列理论，包括：紧凑混合型城市规划、商业集群、整合土地利用和交通规划（公交导向型开发，即“TOD”）、“社会空间”理论和位置战略、综合资源管理（生态循环模式）、循环经济、经济增长与能源消耗脱钩，以及景观和水的生态规划。由于许多重要的城市品质不能减化为定量指标，因此有些有关空间目标的指标是定量的。这些指标建立在建筑、环境心理学和城市形态学领域的研究基础之上。城市品质的定性指标包括以下方面： 简易性和复杂性，开放性和封闭性，识别性和清晰性，养护和秩序，历史底蕴，自然和绿化，有创造性的建筑（凯萨琳娜 Sternudd 2007年）。 清晰的结构和移动的自由度（凯文林奇，1960年）。 当地人行网络的整合程度（Bill Hillier，1996年）。 城市多样性背后的4个因素：密度、基本和次要功能的混合、小型街坊、老建筑（雅各布斯，1961年）。3.指标的选择指标的选择基于以下标准：理论层面和实用角度的有效性；与国际、国内、地区、城市的层面以及项目可持续目标的相关度（图4）；没有冗余（避免重叠的指标）；和可度量性。并在3个空间层次上评价各个指标的相关性：城市/地区30km 2（150km 2）；城区12km 2；建筑物/街坊。曹妃甸生态城的指标体系结合拟定的目标水平将在生态城规划、建设、运营的全过程为规划设计、开发商和承包商提供标准。目标确定了为实现主要的目标和总体愿景需要达到的标准。标准的确定一方面根据基于可持续发展目标的必要性，另一方面基于有关技术方案、当地文化和其他社会经济因素上的合理性。项目目标应该是大胆的，但不能是空想。SWECO公司团队通过与各方之间的合作，共同提出了最终目标水平。对瑞典与中国的最佳实践经验和法规的比较，也为目标的探讨提供了重要信息。在发展曹妃甸指标体系过程中，我们综合使用了自上而下和自下而上的互动的工作方法，这一过程也是整体规划和设计过程不可分割的一部分。瑞典专家在各自的专业领域内确定了重要的指标和合理的目标水平。此后又从共生城市的综合角度，集合并评估这些指标。从经验和理论角度上制订的指标，在随后的研讨会上又与中国专业规划者进行了磋商。总的来说，除了少数目标级别被认为是较高但合理的以外，提议的规划指标大部分是容易理解且适当的。4.灵活的指标体系指标体系目前一共包含了141项指标。使用一个Excel表格结构，指标就可以被清晰地排列出来，并且可根据对其不同的需求而分类排放。还可以增加或减少指标。指标可以根据与以下不同方面的关联性进行组织（图5）： 图5 提议的指标体系的优点是采用系统性和多层次的方法。在这一灵活的系统中，目的、对象、目标和指标都是密切相关的。例如，健康因素和环境因素与规划指标的联系意味着对建设环境中的某些物质特点的要求。因此，指标体系可以反应人、自然、城市之间的动态相互作用。/The advantage of the proposed indicators system is the systematic and multilevel approach. In this flexible system goals, objectives, targets and indicators are all interrelated. For example can health factors and environmental factors be related to planning indicators suggesting certain physical qualities in the built environment. The indicator system can thus reflect the dynamic interaction between humans, nature and the city.总体环境，文化和社会经济目标，中国政府针对国家、区域和城区级别颁布的具体目标和标准； 生态城总的具体目标； 子系统层面的具体目标； 规划、建造或者使用阶段；不同的空间层次：区域、城市、城区、街坊/建筑； 不同子系统的整合规划达到协同。关键指标是部分特别重要的指标，作为专业人员、政府人员及公众之间进行沟通的工具，以明确曹妃甸国际生态城的特殊挑战以及对策。曹妃甸国际生态城的具体目标归结如下：环境目标曹妃甸生态城要成为： 一个自然环境品质得到保护和改善，并结合到城市发展中的城市。一个低能耗，可再生能源利用和资源回收达到领先水平的城市。 一个拥有健康室外和室内环境的城市。 一个支持健康的、环境友好型的生活方式和高品质生活的城市。社会经济文化目标曹妃甸生态城要成为： 一个吸引来自世界各地的游客和商业活动、有吸引力的城市。 一个高等教育和科研成为城市发展的动力的、有创新力的城市。 一个小型新型经济活动得到鼓励和发展的、有经济活力的城市。 一个所有居民享受舒适方便的日常生活的、高品质宜居城市。 一个具有丰富文化表达的、文化繁荣的城市。空间目标曹妃甸生态城要成为： 一个拥有高水平的建筑和城市环境的城市。 一个实现土地高效利用和空间布局结构合理的城市。 一个具有混合功能、布局紧凑，人们可以步行到达主要的公园和公共设施以及公交车站的城市。 一个拥有丰富的视觉表达和各具特色的街区的城市。 一个拥有高品质、开放连续的步行环境的城市。根据ISO标准，目的是定性的，而对象和目标应该是定量的，并且有可能进行测量。同样从空间层次结构而言，目的在一个相对较高的空间层次进行表达，而对象和目标是在较低的空间层次进行表达。策略旨在达到目标。指标可以用作衡量有关对象和目标成绩的分析工具，以及用作一种交流工具。关键指标是指根据重要性从指标的整个范围中选出的指标。部分精选的关键指标如下：（1）城市人口密度：目标水平是每公顷居民数为 300400人（中等密度），其中包括工作岗位的数量。在居民密度高或相对较高的地区要有充分的服务设施和公共空间。不同的城市区域的人口密度应有所不同。（2）服务设施的方便性：在400m范围内享有基本服务功能的住房比率（住宅面积比）。目标值为100%。基本服务包括基本医疗服务（全科医师）、公立学校（义务教育学校）、食杂店和公共交通。（3）混合功能：80%的街坊拥有混合使用功能。住宅和公建的建筑面积的比例分别为从80：20到20：80。混合功能拥有各类文化设施、社会服务、娱乐服务、商务中心、商业服务、交通服务及其他功能。（4）街区大小：220m的基本街坊应进一步细分，每边长度为60100m的小街坊是实现小尺度混合以及小尺度街道的基础，便于行人及自行车通行。（5）本地非机动出行率：所有本地出行中步行或骑自行车交通量的比例（按照出行公里数）。目标值为大于50%。突出了为达到目标的实验性的目标水平，以减少能量要求和运输中产生的二氧化碳排放。（6）能源需求：目标水平设定为每人每年10 000kWh（人均总能耗包括交通运输，但不包括工业）。该目标水平仅是瑞典目前现状的一半。（7）可再生能源：可再生能源占基本能源消耗的比例为95%。为达到目标水平，推荐综合使用风能、潮汐能及工业区的余热。（8）回收利用：大于80%的垃圾将进行回收利用（回收材料和以生物降解对营养的回收）和能量回收。（9）回收用于农业：大于80%的食物垃圾将经过生物处理，产生肥料和回收能量。（10）用水量：人均每日用水量小于120L。由于省内普遍缺水，同时为了减少能源消耗，降低人均用水量至关重要。（11）雨水收集：每年储存的雨水总量的比例为75%。由于缺水，雨水是一种很有价值的水资源。（12）污水分类收集：90%95%的建筑物拥有黑水和灰水分开处理的技术措施。与传统废水处理方法相比，分开处理这些污水将改进资源提取（能量、养分），减少能源消耗。（13）公共绿地：人均公共绿地面积为20m 2，其中包括绿地和集市市场。（14）公共空间包括绿色空间的可达性：住宅区所有居民可在500m的范围内抵达公共空间和绿地。5.结论指标体系建立在还原论原则的基础之上，以“降低复杂性以便使问题量化和容易沟通”（经合组织，1993年）。还原论本身也是兼有利弊。集中到一个选定的验证指标进行分析，便于解读、确定标准和沟通。还原论方法伴随的缺点是对认知进行简化的风险。因此指标的运用必须得到深入的分析和一个健全的、参与性规划过程的支持，以减少还原论方法的弊端。与在较大地理范围的管理指标相比，在较小地域范围的城镇区域或项目上使用的指标体系的发展还不够。（Dobbelsteen & Wilde 2004a，Wong，2006）。在项目层次和城镇地区层次上使用指标体系进行可持续发展的评估还存在难点。主要是缺乏有效的测量工具，缺乏分类的统计数据，因而难以建立空间因素和行为模式之间的因果关系。指标的选择也不是一个简单和精确的事情。选择基于关于建成环境与行为的关系的综合理论和研究，旨在达到更好的未来。在今天还缺乏完善经验的情况下，发展规划指标的工作就是在正确的理论支持与实践可行性之间取得平衡。曹妃甸生态城项目中的指标体系是在规划和设计的过程中通过互动的方式形成的。系统地分析环境问题的共生城市概念和方法是工作的出发点，并通过瑞典、中国专家和当地领导的多向交流选定和进一步发展了各个具体指标。在这一过程中有很多机会参考瑞典和中国的标准，也增进了彼此的了解和认识。希望该过程有助于曹妃甸国际生态城指标体系获得认可和理解，能在实际中指导和支持生态城规划设计、建设和运作的过程，以实现总体构想：即成为响誉世界的“以人为本、社会进步、经济繁荣、气候中性、环境可持续发展”的新城。注释：1瑞典国际开发署. 可持续城市方法， 2007参考文献： 1. Dobbelsteen van den A. & Wilde de S. (2004a). 空间优化利用的概念性可持续环境评估. 环境管理杂志. 73卷: 81-892. Hillier, B. 空间是机器. 剑桥：剑桥大学出版社，19963. Jacobs, J. 美国大城市的生与死. 纽约：兰登德，19614. OECD. 环境指标和环境性能综述-OECD核心指标组.环境专题：83. 巴黎， 19935. SIDA. 可持续性城市途径， 20076. Schylberg, K. 车站附近区域内土地高效利用规划指标. 瑞典吕勒奥理工大学， 20087. Sternudd, C. 小城镇形象对城市形态的美学评价. 瑞典隆德大学， 20078. Wong, C. 城市和地区规划指标：政策和方法的互动.伦敦：RTPI藏书系列，2006The Indicator System of Caofeidian International Eco-City shall guide and support the process of planning and design, production and operating the Eco-City to fulfil the overall vision; to be a world renowned, modern, people-focused, prosperous, climate-neutral and environmentally sustainable society. Indicators should also support a holistic perspective on sustainable urban development including environmental/ ecological, socio-economic, cultural and spatial goals. This means that every indicator should be useful as a tool for actively integrating these goals in planning proposals on different levels but also for follow-up and control of how the goals have been fulfilled. Indicators are also important tools to communicate to politicians and the general public the special challenges in realizing the Caofeidian International Eco-City and solutions to these challenges. The indicator system includes two types of indicators: planning indicators and monitoring indicators. In the current planning phase the focus is on the planning indicators. Planning indicators were introduced in a Swedish planning context in the late 1990s as tools to implement environmental objectives in comprehensive spatial planning. The last ten years the planning indicator tool has been the object for research and development projects with governmental funding but is not yet to be regarded as common praxis in Swedish planning practice. Planning indicators are complements to indicators for monitoring purposes that are usually based on information from statistics. Monitoring indicators give information about the present state and the past, but not about future situations. The strategic importance of the planning indicator is due to its use as a tool to facilitate discussions about future consequences in an early stage of the planning process. Planning indicators describe factors that can be gathered from a spatial plan, either directly or indirectly by making conclusions based on circumstances that are readable in the plan. Selected planning indicators reflect the current Swedish development in planning theory and practice and have been adapted to the special challenges of Caofeidian Eco-City. 1.An Indicator System Based on the SymbioCity Approach The indicator system for caofeidian Eco-city is based on the SymbioCity integrated and multidisciplinary approach, meaning that the SymbioCity approach can be represented in a conceptual model that helps understanding the fundamental principles of a modern sustainable city. Conceptual consolidation of the indicator system was in this case done by adapting the SymbioCity conceptual approach to the specific local conditions and planning objectives in the Caofeidian or the other way around framing the specific local conditions and planning objectives within the SymbioCity conceptual model. Conceptual consolidation meaning explaining and highlighting the founding concept to be represented by the analysis and pinning down the strategic and political context. The framework also provides the base for an analytical structure to arrange indicators and a logic ground for identification and selection of indicators. 2.SymbioCity Conceptual Model The conceptual model of the SymbioCity approach can be illustrated in a diagram. The inner ring in the top diagram includes environmental factors such as climate change, natural and artificial hazards etc. The next ring represents a number of subsystems that must be taken into account if improvements of environmental situations are to be achieved (Figs. 1,2). These subsystems encompass development and management of urban functions such as industry, housing and service as well as traffic and transportation planning and management, energy, waste and water planning and management, landscape planning and building planning and design. These subsystems can be analysed and developed for an entire city or city-district. The exterior ring represents the institutional factors that have to be taken into consideration to achieve long term change. A wide definition of institutional factors includes urban governance, urban planning, land management, legislation and policies, financing, private sector participation, training and technology in a general sense ( SIDA, 2007). Planning and monitoring indicators relate to the conceptual model as follows (Fig. 3): Planning indicators are mainly designed at the subsystem level of urban environment and technical system solutions, which is indicated in the third ring of the diagram, by suggesting certain physical qualities or estimated outcomes. Suggested technical system solutions as well as urban structures can be subject to review based on these indicators. Monitoring indicators are related to environmental factors and socio-economic key issues in the second ring in the diagram. Monitoring indictors measure and evaluate the Citys progress over time in relation to certain sustainability objectives and targets on an international, national, regional or city level. Following from the SymbioCity concept indicators are identified and aggregated at the subsystem level. When planning indicators are used to generate system solutions and design proposals and to perform sustainability reviews of proposals these tasks are facilitated if indicators are organised around the subsystems. The SymbioCity approach promotes holistic and sustainable urban development, seeking potential synergies between urban functions and urban technology systems, using closed-loop systems to improve efficiency, increase profitability and save natural resources. True to this holistic approach planning indicators are theoretically validated by using planning theories and strategies with a holistic or multifaceted perspective on sustainable city issues such as: compact mixed city planning, business clustering, integrated land use and transport planning (TOD), socio-spatial concepts and location strategies, integrated resource management (the Eco-Cycle model), closed loop economy, decoupling of economic growth from increased energy demand as well as ecological planning of landscape and water. Many important urban qualities can not be reduced to quantitative indicators, many indicators related to spatial goals are therefore qualitative. These indicators are based on research within the field of architecture, environmental psychology and urban morphology. Urban quality can for example be evaluated from the perspective of: simplicity and complexity, openness and closure, recognition and legibility, maintenance and order, historical attachment, nature and greenery, creative architecture (Sternudd, 2007). legible structures and freedom of movement (Lynch, 1960). integration of local road network for pedestrians (Hillier, 1996). four constituent factors behind urban diversity: density, mix of primary and secondary uses, small blocks, aged buildings (Jacobs, 1961). 3. Selecting Indicators Indicators are selected based on criteria such as theoretical and empirical validity; relevance to sustainability objectives on a project level as well as on international, national, regional or city level (fig 4); avoiding overlapping indicators; measurability. Each indicator is evaluated as for their relevance at three spatial levels: The city/region 30 sqkm (150 sqkm); The city district 12 sqkm; The building/block. Indicators combined with target levels give a standard to guide planners, developers and contractors through the whole process of planning and designing, production and operating the Caofeidian Eco-City. Target specify necessary standards to achieve prioritised objectives and the overall vision. Targets are set from a combined standpoint of what is necessary in relation to sustainability objectives as well as what is reasonable in relation to technical solutions, local culture and other socio-economic considerations. Project targets should be bold but not utopian. Final target levels were proposed in collaboration between Sweco and Chinese counterparts. Benchmarking the Swedish and Chinese best practice and legislation gave important information to the target discussion. In developing the Caofeidian indicator system we used a combined top-down and bottom-up approach in an iterative process which was also an integrated part of the whole planning and design process. Indicators were selected by Swedish experts identifying a number of important indicators and reasonable target levels within their professional field. Indicators were assembled and evaluated in relation to the holistic perspective of the SymbioCity approach. Indicators worked out from an empirical and theoretical perspective were later tested on a focus group of professional Chinese planners in a workshop. On the whole proposed planning indicators where seen as easy to understand and relevant. With a few exceptions target levels were considered high but reasonable. 4.A Flexible Indicator System The indicator system includes a total of 141 indicators. Using an Excel model, indicators can be listed and sorted by their relevance to different needs. Indicators can also be added or subtracted. Indicators can for example be sorted by their relevance in relation to (Fig. 5): the overall environmental, cultural and socio-economic goals,objectives and targets stated by the Chinese government on national, regional and district level. the overall objectives of the Eco-City. objectives formulated at the level of the subsystem. synergies from integrated planning of different subsystems. the planning, construction or operating phases. different spatial levels: the regional, city, city district or block/building level. Key indicators, i.e. particularily important indicators, are used to communicate to pol