城际交通引导下的城市群空间组织研究
|
摘要
在城市化进程中，一个令人瞩目的现象是城市群的出现。城市群是城市规模和城市经济发展到一定程度后，聚集于城市非农产业活动和城市的其它功能向周边扩散，或者地缘上接近的城市间物质交流日益紧密而产生同城效应，从而使一定地域范围内的城市(城镇)保持密切的社会经济联系，形成资源、环境、基础设施共享，产业经济活动密切关联，具有一体化倾向的城市功能地域。城市群的出现不仅使城市地域空间形态及规模发生重组和变化，而且使资本、产业、劳动力等要素形成新的流动和布局。城市群空间组织指各物质要素(物质空间各要素的位置关系)和活动要素(经济社会文化等活动的空间分布)在城市群体地域空间上的空间布局和运动过程。
国外对城市群空间组织的理论研究最早可追溯到E．Howard的田园城市理论以及随后对卫星城、新城建设的探讨。此后，P．Geddes和L-Munford等积极推进城市区域研究，提出了从城市以外更为广阔的地域来研究城市空间组织问题。此后，P．Hall、J．Friedman、P．J．Knox等从世界城市、全球一体化、信息技术网络化的角度对世界大城市群的特征、功能、结构、等级体系等进行了开拓性的研究。20世纪80年代后，我国学者开始涉足大城市的空间组织研究。研究领域集中在全球化背景下大城市的发展问题，如人口迁移、城市郊区化、郊区城市化方面；中国城市的国际化或国际城市的空间发展方面：城市群外向型经济、新型产业区、投资对城市空间结构的影响方面。
对城市群空间组织的研究，城市地理学、城市经济学、经济地理学、社会学等各有建树。从理论上看，城市地理学重点从规模、职能、空间三大结构和基础设施网络方面展开对城市空间组织的研究，但对城市群这种新的城市空间形态的研究不够深入。城市经济学主要从事城市产业发展、产业结构调整和城市经济发展战略研究，对城市经济活动的空间布局较少涉及。经济地理学虽然对经济活动的集聚扩散，新产业区的形成有所研究，但对产业布局如何与城市空间组织相结合的研究还较薄弱。城市规划学一直致力于城市空间的规划、设计和整合研究，但对城市空间演变的理论研究还较少涉及。城市交通学对城市综合交通规划研究细致深入，也有学者开始了对城市群交通的研究，但对城市群空间与城际交通之间相互作用机制的探讨还较肤浅。
就城市群的空间布局来看，多中心结构是比较普遍的布局形态，相对于单核向心集聚发展的城市空间结构具有明显的优势。西方国家的城市群多中心的形成，主要是在城市郊区化推动下，在城市周围出现次中心(卫星城、新城)、边缘城市，从而在空间形态上形成多中心布局。中外学者虽然也注意到多中心布局有强核心多中心和弱核心多中心等城市群空间形态，但就城市群空间的演进模式和演进机制的研究，却多集中于单中心向多中心的演变这条主线。很明显，我国城市群如山东半岛城市群、长株潭城市群等，其演进模式和演进机制，遵循的是多中心分工协作、共生共荣的发展道路，其发展的路径选择跟单中心—多中心模式是根本不同的。考虑到在经济全球化和区域一体化的推动下，城市群的经济活动并不局限于城市群内部，还会产生跨国际、跨群际的“城市流”，不仅推动城市群自身发展和空间演进，而且可能会进一步促进群际“接壤”，形成更大规模的城市群，即都市连绵区。笔者将上述三种城市群发展模式命名为：单核裂变型、多核共生型、网络开放型空间组织形式。
就城市群空间演变的动力机制来看，学者们针对不同城市的形成与发展，从郊区化、人口迁移、新产业区建设、外资流入等方面进行了理论和实证研究。但有两方面缺陷：首先，城市的空间演变是经济社会活动综合作用的结果，从劳动力或资本或技术等角度择其一二来研究城市空间运动都是不全面的。其次，既然城市群是不同城市体系组合形成的地域空间形态，从单一城市或仅从城市内部来研究城市群空间运动是偏颇的。笔者认为，城市群空间演变，来自于三种力量：一是来自城市内部，规模经济、范围经济、集聚经济效应的共同作用，使劳动力、资本、技术等物质要素集聚扩散形成了城市空间演变的推动力；二是来自城市外部，城市之间的经济联系，吸引城市之间物质要素流动和重新分布，“投影”到城市地域，表现为不同的城市群布局形态；三是来自政府和社会等的调节作用，城市规划、道路的建设等政府行为，以及社会组织调节的劳动力、资金流动等，对城市群的形成产生了重要影响。推动力、吸引力、调节力构成了城市群空间演变的动力系统。
交通尤其是城际交通对城市群空间演变发挥着独一无二的作用。交通引导了城市空间的拓展方向，构成了城市空间发展骨架，使城市空间结构呈现出星状、带状、不规则伸展等多种形态；交通的发展降低了单位运输费用，促进了城市经济活动的向外扩散，在城市之外具有一定区域优势的地区形成新的集聚点，促进多中心的形成；交通密切了城市、城镇之间的经济联系，促进了城市分工细化和功能演化，带动了作为城市群各中心的城市的发展和城际的要素流动和组合。推动力、吸引力和调节力通过作用于交通网络，推动了城市群空间的演变。此外，城市群经济发展、规模扩大等对城际交通也提出了很高的要求，选择合理的交通方式对推动城市经济发展和空间结构优化具有重要意义。笔者沿着古典区位理论—新经济地理学—新兴古典经济学的理论脉搏，在安虎森等人研究的基础上，通过建立模型，得出两个重要结论：1．单中心城市空间的同心圆拓展是市场机制作用的结果，除非出现集聚不经济效应，否则不会自行停止。针对我国实际，在城市化迅速发展，城市向心集聚发展的情况下，改变城市“摊大饼”式发展的弊端，必须通过发展城际交通，畅通主城—星城(新城)的联系，提高通勤效率，建立空间布局合理、联系紧密的多中心结构。2．随着交通效率的提高，地缘相近但原本相对独立、各自发展的城市，其均匀分布状态被打破，城市之间集聚力明显增强，开始出现“同城效应”，城市群开始出现，各城市联系日益紧密，城市空间结构显现出多中心网络状的分布结构。针对我国“规划”城市群“形似神异”的特点，通过发展城际交通促进城市之间的实质性融合，对城市群的发展具有重要意义。从而为城际交通引导城市群空间组织提供了理论基础。
城市群交通有多种方式，公路、铁路、航空、航运构成了复杂的网络式城市群交通体系。引导不同的城市群空间组织模式，需要不同的交通方式。笔者在研究国外城市群形成过程以及国内大城市空间发展的基础上，得出两个结论：1．大城市实现单核裂变式发展，关键要解决宿于主城而业于辅城，或宿于辅城而业于主城的庞大群体的通勤需要，轨道交通因其速度快、容量大、站距大的特点使多中心的发展成为可能，同时避免了公路交通容易导致城市沿交通线无序蔓延的弊端；2．多核共生型城市群，由于城市通勤距离往往在50公里以上，而且其城市要素流动以物流为主，人员流量无法突破轨道交通的门槛，轨道交通不经济，建设高速公路是比较合理的选择。另外，对跨国际、跨群际城市之间的交通，由于跨距较大、地理隔阻，航空、航运适合网络开放型城市群交通需要。本文就交通与城市群空间组织的作用机制进行了研究。并结合不同城市群发展模式，将基于轨道交通的单核裂变式城市群空间组织、基于高速公路的多核共生式城市群空间组织、基于航空航海的网络开放式城市群空间组织进行了系统分析。本文以巴黎都市区、穗深港城市带等为例，对不同城际交通方式与城市群空间组织进行了实证分析。最后，对济南城市空间优化以及以济南城市群空间组织进行了实证研究。
综上，本文从城际交通推动城市群发展的理论基础，到城市群空间组织的三种模式，再到城市群发展的动力机制和城际交通对城市群空间演变的作用机制，最后到不同交通方式引导下的城市群空间组织进行了递进式、系统化的研究。对城市群空间组织、城市群交通方式选择等领域的研究有一定借鉴意义。
In the process of urbanization, a remarkable phenomenon is the emergence of urban agglomeration. When the city size and economy develop to a certain degree, the non-agricultural industries gathered in urban area and the other city functions will spread around the city, or the material exchange among cities have become increasingly close to each other, thus the cities (towns) in certain region maintain close social and economic communication, and form the integration of city function areas, which is called urban agglomeration, that share the resources, environment, and infrastructure, with close industrial economic relationship. The emergence of urban agglomeration not only caused the reorganization and change of city geographic space form and scale, but also formed a new flow and distribution capital, industry, labor and otherfactors. Urban agglomeration's spatial organization is also the space distribution and movement of the material elements (space relationship among all material elements) and the activity elements (spatialdistribution of economic, social, cultural activities) in the space of urbanagglomeration.
Study abroad on the theory of urban agglomeration's spatial organization can be traced back to E. Hoard's Garden City Theory and the subsequent discussion on the construction of satellite city and new city. Latterly, P.Geddes and L.Munford actively promoted the research on urban and regional development, and recommended to study the urban space issues from the broader area outside of the city. P.Hall, J.Friedman and P.J. Knox explored the characteristics, functions, structure and grading system of big cities all over the world from an aspect of world cities, globalization, and the information technology networks. Since 1980s of the 20th century, Chinese scholars also started research on the spatial organization in big cities. Research focused on the development of big cities under the background of globalization, such aspopulation migration, suburbanization and urbanization in the suburbs;internationalization of Chinese cities or spatial development ofinternational cities; the export-oriented economy of urban agglomeration, . New industrial are and the impact of investment on urban spatial structure.
Urban geography, urban economics, economic geography and sociology have contributed more or less to the research on urban spatial organization. Theoretically speaking, the urban geography focus on the three major elements: scale, function and space, and the infrastructurenetwork as well, but the new urban spatial pattern - urban agglomerationhas not been fully studied. Urban economics focus on urban industrial development, industrial restructuring and urban economic developmentstrategies, whereas little study has been done on the spatial distribution of urban economic activities. Economic geography covered certain studies on the combination and spread of economic activities, and theformation of new industrial areas, however, less study is available on the combination between industry distribution and urban spatialorganization. City planning is mostly focused on city space planning, design and integration, and less theoretical study is available on the urban spatial evolution. Urban transportation include meticulous research on the comprehensive urban transportation planning, some researchers are beginning to study the transportation in urban agglomeration, nevertheless, a further understanding is required on the interaction mechanism between urban agglomeration space and inter city transportation.
Multi-center structure is a relatively common style and apparently superior to the single nuclear development style as far as the spatial distribution of urban agglomeration is concerned. In western countries, the formation of multi-center urban agglomeration is mainly caused by suburbanization, including the formation of sub-centers (satellite city, new city) and edge city, and formation of multi-center distribution.Although many Chinese and foreign scholars have noted theulti-center distribution has both strong core multi-center group and weak core multi-center group, the study on evolution pattern andhanism of urban agglomeration space has been mainly focused on the evolution from single-center to multi-center. Obviously, urbanagglomerations in China such as the urban agglomeration in Shandong Peninsula urban agglomeration and Changzhutan urban agglomeration have developed following a multi-center collaboration and coexist, co-developing path with respect of the evolution pattern and mechanism.The choice of development path is fundamentally different from that for a single-center model. Considering that with the promotion of economic globalization and regional integration, economic activities are not confined to be inside the urban agglomeration, the international and inter-cluster 'city flow' is not only able to promote the self development of urban agglomeration and spatial evolution, but also can further promote the 'interaction' among urban agglomerations and create a larger scale urban agglomeration, as the megalopolis. The author namethe above three development models of urban agglomeration as: single nuclear fission type, polynuclear symbiotic type and network open spatial organization.
As far as the dynamic mechanism of urban agglomeration space evolution is concerned, researchers have conducted theoretical and empirical studies from the aspect of suburbanization, migration, construction of new industrial area and the influx of foreign capital according to the formation and development of various cities. There aretwo limitations of these studies: First, the evolution of urban space is a result of the comprehensive economic and social activities. Therefore, itis a full scale study if only one or two of the factors labor, capital or technology were considered to study the urban space dynamics.econdly, as the urban agglomeration is geographical space consist ofdifferent urban systems, it is biased to study the urban agglomeration space movement from city to city or from inside of the city. The author believes that the evolution of urban agglomeration space is driven by three forces: the first is the combined effect of scale, scope and integration economies from inside cities, has made the labor, capital, technology and other material elements as driving force for the evolution of urban agglomeration space movement. The second is from outside of the cities. The inter-city economic communication causes the flow andand re-distribution of material elements among cities, which is 'projected' on urban regions as different distribution patterns of urban agglomeration; Third is the regulating forces from governments and society. City planning, road construction and other acts of the government, together with the regulation of labor and cash flow by social organizations, have played an important role in the formation of urban agglomeration. The driving force, attraction, and regulating force constitute the dynamical system of the evolution of urban agglomeration space.
Transportation, in particular the inter-city transportation plays a unique role in the evolution of urban agglomeration space. Transportation orients the direction of the development of urban space, constitutes the city's spatial development framework. Urban spatial structure appears the asteroid, stretching and other irregular shapes. Transportation development has lowered unit costs of transportation and promoted the spreading of urban economic activities and forming new gathering point in the area of certain regional advantages, and the formation of multi centers. Transportation has contributed the economic communications among cities and towns, and promoted the specialization and evolution of urban division and function. It also drives the development of each center city and the flow and combination of elements among cities. The driving force, attraction force and regulating force have promoted the evolution of urban agglomeration space throughthe transportation network. In addition, the economic development ofurban agglomeration, the size expansion have also raised the requirement for inter-city transportation. Choosing an appropriate mode of transportation is of great significance to promote economic development and urban spatial structure optimization. Following the classical regional theory, the new economic geography and new classicaleconomics, and based on the research by An hu sen, the author has developed models and drawn two important conclusions: 1. The concentric expansion of single center city space results from the market mechanism and wont stop unless there is integration non-economic effect. In light of China's reality, with the rapid urbanization, urban central development, to overcome the disadvantages of spreading development type, it is necessary to increase transportation efficiency and build reasonable, close related multi-center distribution by developing inter-city transportation, and dredging the interaction between center city and satellite city. 2. With the improvement of theransportation efficiency, the uniform distribution has been broken among cities that are geographically close to each other but originally in the independent development. The attraction among cities has been markedly increased, uniform effect appears and urban agglomeration is formed. Cities become increasingly close to each other, and the urban spatial structure reveals a multi-center network-like structure. Considering the planned urban agglomerations in china are facially similar but essentially different, To promote the substantial integration of cities by developing inter-city transportation is of great significance for the development of urban agglomerations, consequently provides a theoretical foundation for the urban agglomeration's spatial organization oriented by inter-city transportation.
There are many forms of urban agglomeration transportation, road, railway, aviation and shipping constitutes a complex, network-like urban agglomeration transportation system. Different modes of transportation are needed to guide different spatial organization pattern of the urban agglomeration. The author has studied the formation process of urban agglomerations abroad and the spatial development of domestic cities, and made two conclusions: 1. For the nuclear fission type of single-city development, the key is to resolve the transportation requirement of a large population to live in the center city and work in the satellite city or vise versa. Urban mass transit (UMT) makes the multi-center possible because of its high speed, large capacity, and long distance between stations. It also helps avoid the random spreading of cities along the traffic lines resulted from road transportation. 2. For polynuclear symbiotic urban agglomeration, as urban commuting distance is often longer than 50 kilometers, and the major element flow is material flow, population flow can not exceed lower limit of UMT, therefore UMT is not economic, whereas the construction of highway is a more reasonable choice. In addition, for the trans-international, inter-city transportation urban agglomerations, because of the long distance and geographical obstacles, aviation an shipping can meet the transportation requirement of network like, open urban agglomerations. In this work,the function mechanism of transportation on urban agglomeration's spatial organization was investigated; a creative and systematic analysis was performed on the nuclear fission-urban agglomeration's spatial organization based on UMT, the polynuclear symbiotic -urban agglomeration's spatial organization based on highway transportation and the network like, open urban agglomeration's spatial organization based on aviation and shipping. Using the Paris metropolitan area, Guangzhou, Shenzhen and Hong Kong and other cities as examples, an empirical analysis was performed on different inter-city transportation modes and urban agglomeration's spatial organization. Finally, empirical study was conducted on the spatial optimization of Jinan city and on the Mid-Shandong urban agglomeration's spatial organization centered at Jinan.
In summary, this work includes a progressive and systematic study from the inter-city transportation promoting the development of urban agglomeration, namely, the theoretical basis, to the three models for the evolution of urban agglomeration space, the to the dynamic mechanism of urban agglomeration development and the function mechanism of inter-city transportation to the evolution of urban agglomeration space,and finally to the urban agglomeration's spatial organization oriented by different modes of transportation. This research is important as a reference for the study of urban agglomeration's spatial organization and the mode selection of transportation in urban agglomeration.
国外对城市群空间组织的理论研究最早可追溯到E．Howard的田园城市理论以及随后对卫星城、新城建设的探讨。此后，P．Geddes和L-Munford等积极推进城市区域研究，提出了从城市以外更为广阔的地域来研究城市空间组织问题。此后，P．Hall、J．Friedman、P．J．Knox等从世界城市、全球一体化、信息技术网络化的角度对世界大城市群的特征、功能、结构、等级体系等进行了开拓性的研究。20世纪80年代后，我国学者开始涉足大城市的空间组织研究。研究领域集中在全球化背景下大城市的发展问题，如人口迁移、城市郊区化、郊区城市化方面；中国城市的国际化或国际城市的空间发展方面：城市群外向型经济、新型产业区、投资对城市空间结构的影响方面。
对城市群空间组织的研究，城市地理学、城市经济学、经济地理学、社会学等各有建树。从理论上看，城市地理学重点从规模、职能、空间三大结构和基础设施网络方面展开对城市空间组织的研究，但对城市群这种新的城市空间形态的研究不够深入。城市经济学主要从事城市产业发展、产业结构调整和城市经济发展战略研究，对城市经济活动的空间布局较少涉及。经济地理学虽然对经济活动的集聚扩散，新产业区的形成有所研究，但对产业布局如何与城市空间组织相结合的研究还较薄弱。城市规划学一直致力于城市空间的规划、设计和整合研究，但对城市空间演变的理论研究还较少涉及。城市交通学对城市综合交通规划研究细致深入，也有学者开始了对城市群交通的研究，但对城市群空间与城际交通之间相互作用机制的探讨还较肤浅。
就城市群的空间布局来看，多中心结构是比较普遍的布局形态，相对于单核向心集聚发展的城市空间结构具有明显的优势。西方国家的城市群多中心的形成，主要是在城市郊区化推动下，在城市周围出现次中心(卫星城、新城)、边缘城市，从而在空间形态上形成多中心布局。中外学者虽然也注意到多中心布局有强核心多中心和弱核心多中心等城市群空间形态，但就城市群空间的演进模式和演进机制的研究，却多集中于单中心向多中心的演变这条主线。很明显，我国城市群如山东半岛城市群、长株潭城市群等，其演进模式和演进机制，遵循的是多中心分工协作、共生共荣的发展道路，其发展的路径选择跟单中心—多中心模式是根本不同的。考虑到在经济全球化和区域一体化的推动下，城市群的经济活动并不局限于城市群内部，还会产生跨国际、跨群际的“城市流”，不仅推动城市群自身发展和空间演进，而且可能会进一步促进群际“接壤”，形成更大规模的城市群，即都市连绵区。笔者将上述三种城市群发展模式命名为：单核裂变型、多核共生型、网络开放型空间组织形式。
就城市群空间演变的动力机制来看，学者们针对不同城市的形成与发展，从郊区化、人口迁移、新产业区建设、外资流入等方面进行了理论和实证研究。但有两方面缺陷：首先，城市的空间演变是经济社会活动综合作用的结果，从劳动力或资本或技术等角度择其一二来研究城市空间运动都是不全面的。其次，既然城市群是不同城市体系组合形成的地域空间形态，从单一城市或仅从城市内部来研究城市群空间运动是偏颇的。笔者认为，城市群空间演变，来自于三种力量：一是来自城市内部，规模经济、范围经济、集聚经济效应的共同作用，使劳动力、资本、技术等物质要素集聚扩散形成了城市空间演变的推动力；二是来自城市外部，城市之间的经济联系，吸引城市之间物质要素流动和重新分布，“投影”到城市地域，表现为不同的城市群布局形态；三是来自政府和社会等的调节作用，城市规划、道路的建设等政府行为，以及社会组织调节的劳动力、资金流动等，对城市群的形成产生了重要影响。推动力、吸引力、调节力构成了城市群空间演变的动力系统。
交通尤其是城际交通对城市群空间演变发挥着独一无二的作用。交通引导了城市空间的拓展方向，构成了城市空间发展骨架，使城市空间结构呈现出星状、带状、不规则伸展等多种形态；交通的发展降低了单位运输费用，促进了城市经济活动的向外扩散，在城市之外具有一定区域优势的地区形成新的集聚点，促进多中心的形成；交通密切了城市、城镇之间的经济联系，促进了城市分工细化和功能演化，带动了作为城市群各中心的城市的发展和城际的要素流动和组合。推动力、吸引力和调节力通过作用于交通网络，推动了城市群空间的演变。此外，城市群经济发展、规模扩大等对城际交通也提出了很高的要求，选择合理的交通方式对推动城市经济发展和空间结构优化具有重要意义。笔者沿着古典区位理论—新经济地理学—新兴古典经济学的理论脉搏，在安虎森等人研究的基础上，通过建立模型，得出两个重要结论：1．单中心城市空间的同心圆拓展是市场机制作用的结果，除非出现集聚不经济效应，否则不会自行停止。针对我国实际，在城市化迅速发展，城市向心集聚发展的情况下，改变城市“摊大饼”式发展的弊端，必须通过发展城际交通，畅通主城—星城(新城)的联系，提高通勤效率，建立空间布局合理、联系紧密的多中心结构。2．随着交通效率的提高，地缘相近但原本相对独立、各自发展的城市，其均匀分布状态被打破，城市之间集聚力明显增强，开始出现“同城效应”，城市群开始出现，各城市联系日益紧密，城市空间结构显现出多中心网络状的分布结构。针对我国“规划”城市群“形似神异”的特点，通过发展城际交通促进城市之间的实质性融合，对城市群的发展具有重要意义。从而为城际交通引导城市群空间组织提供了理论基础。
城市群交通有多种方式，公路、铁路、航空、航运构成了复杂的网络式城市群交通体系。引导不同的城市群空间组织模式，需要不同的交通方式。笔者在研究国外城市群形成过程以及国内大城市空间发展的基础上，得出两个结论：1．大城市实现单核裂变式发展，关键要解决宿于主城而业于辅城，或宿于辅城而业于主城的庞大群体的通勤需要，轨道交通因其速度快、容量大、站距大的特点使多中心的发展成为可能，同时避免了公路交通容易导致城市沿交通线无序蔓延的弊端；2．多核共生型城市群，由于城市通勤距离往往在50公里以上，而且其城市要素流动以物流为主，人员流量无法突破轨道交通的门槛，轨道交通不经济，建设高速公路是比较合理的选择。另外，对跨国际、跨群际城市之间的交通，由于跨距较大、地理隔阻，航空、航运适合网络开放型城市群交通需要。本文就交通与城市群空间组织的作用机制进行了研究。并结合不同城市群发展模式，将基于轨道交通的单核裂变式城市群空间组织、基于高速公路的多核共生式城市群空间组织、基于航空航海的网络开放式城市群空间组织进行了系统分析。本文以巴黎都市区、穗深港城市带等为例，对不同城际交通方式与城市群空间组织进行了实证分析。最后，对济南城市空间优化以及以济南城市群空间组织进行了实证研究。
综上，本文从城际交通推动城市群发展的理论基础，到城市群空间组织的三种模式，再到城市群发展的动力机制和城际交通对城市群空间演变的作用机制，最后到不同交通方式引导下的城市群空间组织进行了递进式、系统化的研究。对城市群空间组织、城市群交通方式选择等领域的研究有一定借鉴意义。
In the process of urbanization, a remarkable phenomenon is the emergence of urban agglomeration. When the city size and economy develop to a certain degree, the non-agricultural industries gathered in urban area and the other city functions will spread around the city, or the material exchange among cities have become increasingly close to each other, thus the cities (towns) in certain region maintain close social and economic communication, and form the integration of city function areas, which is called urban agglomeration, that share the resources, environment, and infrastructure, with close industrial economic relationship. The emergence of urban agglomeration not only caused the reorganization and change of city geographic space form and scale, but also formed a new flow and distribution capital, industry, labor and otherfactors. Urban agglomeration's spatial organization is also the space distribution and movement of the material elements (space relationship among all material elements) and the activity elements (spatialdistribution of economic, social, cultural activities) in the space of urbanagglomeration.
Study abroad on the theory of urban agglomeration's spatial organization can be traced back to E. Hoard's Garden City Theory and the subsequent discussion on the construction of satellite city and new city. Latterly, P.Geddes and L.Munford actively promoted the research on urban and regional development, and recommended to study the urban space issues from the broader area outside of the city. P.Hall, J.Friedman and P.J. Knox explored the characteristics, functions, structure and grading system of big cities all over the world from an aspect of world cities, globalization, and the information technology networks. Since 1980s of the 20th century, Chinese scholars also started research on the spatial organization in big cities. Research focused on the development of big cities under the background of globalization, such aspopulation migration, suburbanization and urbanization in the suburbs;internationalization of Chinese cities or spatial development ofinternational cities; the export-oriented economy of urban agglomeration, . New industrial are and the impact of investment on urban spatial structure.
Urban geography, urban economics, economic geography and sociology have contributed more or less to the research on urban spatial organization. Theoretically speaking, the urban geography focus on the three major elements: scale, function and space, and the infrastructurenetwork as well, but the new urban spatial pattern - urban agglomerationhas not been fully studied. Urban economics focus on urban industrial development, industrial restructuring and urban economic developmentstrategies, whereas little study has been done on the spatial distribution of urban economic activities. Economic geography covered certain studies on the combination and spread of economic activities, and theformation of new industrial areas, however, less study is available on the combination between industry distribution and urban spatialorganization. City planning is mostly focused on city space planning, design and integration, and less theoretical study is available on the urban spatial evolution. Urban transportation include meticulous research on the comprehensive urban transportation planning, some researchers are beginning to study the transportation in urban agglomeration, nevertheless, a further understanding is required on the interaction mechanism between urban agglomeration space and inter city transportation.
Multi-center structure is a relatively common style and apparently superior to the single nuclear development style as far as the spatial distribution of urban agglomeration is concerned. In western countries, the formation of multi-center urban agglomeration is mainly caused by suburbanization, including the formation of sub-centers (satellite city, new city) and edge city, and formation of multi-center distribution.Although many Chinese and foreign scholars have noted theulti-center distribution has both strong core multi-center group and weak core multi-center group, the study on evolution pattern andhanism of urban agglomeration space has been mainly focused on the evolution from single-center to multi-center. Obviously, urbanagglomerations in China such as the urban agglomeration in Shandong Peninsula urban agglomeration and Changzhutan urban agglomeration have developed following a multi-center collaboration and coexist, co-developing path with respect of the evolution pattern and mechanism.The choice of development path is fundamentally different from that for a single-center model. Considering that with the promotion of economic globalization and regional integration, economic activities are not confined to be inside the urban agglomeration, the international and inter-cluster 'city flow' is not only able to promote the self development of urban agglomeration and spatial evolution, but also can further promote the 'interaction' among urban agglomerations and create a larger scale urban agglomeration, as the megalopolis. The author namethe above three development models of urban agglomeration as: single nuclear fission type, polynuclear symbiotic type and network open spatial organization.
As far as the dynamic mechanism of urban agglomeration space evolution is concerned, researchers have conducted theoretical and empirical studies from the aspect of suburbanization, migration, construction of new industrial area and the influx of foreign capital according to the formation and development of various cities. There aretwo limitations of these studies: First, the evolution of urban space is a result of the comprehensive economic and social activities. Therefore, itis a full scale study if only one or two of the factors labor, capital or technology were considered to study the urban space dynamics.econdly, as the urban agglomeration is geographical space consist ofdifferent urban systems, it is biased to study the urban agglomeration space movement from city to city or from inside of the city. The author believes that the evolution of urban agglomeration space is driven by three forces: the first is the combined effect of scale, scope and integration economies from inside cities, has made the labor, capital, technology and other material elements as driving force for the evolution of urban agglomeration space movement. The second is from outside of the cities. The inter-city economic communication causes the flow andand re-distribution of material elements among cities, which is 'projected' on urban regions as different distribution patterns of urban agglomeration; Third is the regulating forces from governments and society. City planning, road construction and other acts of the government, together with the regulation of labor and cash flow by social organizations, have played an important role in the formation of urban agglomeration. The driving force, attraction, and regulating force constitute the dynamical system of the evolution of urban agglomeration space.
Transportation, in particular the inter-city transportation plays a unique role in the evolution of urban agglomeration space. Transportation orients the direction of the development of urban space, constitutes the city's spatial development framework. Urban spatial structure appears the asteroid, stretching and other irregular shapes. Transportation development has lowered unit costs of transportation and promoted the spreading of urban economic activities and forming new gathering point in the area of certain regional advantages, and the formation of multi centers. Transportation has contributed the economic communications among cities and towns, and promoted the specialization and evolution of urban division and function. It also drives the development of each center city and the flow and combination of elements among cities. The driving force, attraction force and regulating force have promoted the evolution of urban agglomeration space throughthe transportation network. In addition, the economic development ofurban agglomeration, the size expansion have also raised the requirement for inter-city transportation. Choosing an appropriate mode of transportation is of great significance to promote economic development and urban spatial structure optimization. Following the classical regional theory, the new economic geography and new classicaleconomics, and based on the research by An hu sen, the author has developed models and drawn two important conclusions: 1. The concentric expansion of single center city space results from the market mechanism and wont stop unless there is integration non-economic effect. In light of China's reality, with the rapid urbanization, urban central development, to overcome the disadvantages of spreading development type, it is necessary to increase transportation efficiency and build reasonable, close related multi-center distribution by developing inter-city transportation, and dredging the interaction between center city and satellite city. 2. With the improvement of theransportation efficiency, the uniform distribution has been broken among cities that are geographically close to each other but originally in the independent development. The attraction among cities has been markedly increased, uniform effect appears and urban agglomeration is formed. Cities become increasingly close to each other, and the urban spatial structure reveals a multi-center network-like structure. Considering the planned urban agglomerations in china are facially similar but essentially different, To promote the substantial integration of cities by developing inter-city transportation is of great significance for the development of urban agglomerations, consequently provides a theoretical foundation for the urban agglomeration's spatial organization oriented by inter-city transportation.
There are many forms of urban agglomeration transportation, road, railway, aviation and shipping constitutes a complex, network-like urban agglomeration transportation system. Different modes of transportation are needed to guide different spatial organization pattern of the urban agglomeration. The author has studied the formation process of urban agglomerations abroad and the spatial development of domestic cities, and made two conclusions: 1. For the nuclear fission type of single-city development, the key is to resolve the transportation requirement of a large population to live in the center city and work in the satellite city or vise versa. Urban mass transit (UMT) makes the multi-center possible because of its high speed, large capacity, and long distance between stations. It also helps avoid the random spreading of cities along the traffic lines resulted from road transportation. 2. For polynuclear symbiotic urban agglomeration, as urban commuting distance is often longer than 50 kilometers, and the major element flow is material flow, population flow can not exceed lower limit of UMT, therefore UMT is not economic, whereas the construction of highway is a more reasonable choice. In addition, for the trans-international, inter-city transportation urban agglomerations, because of the long distance and geographical obstacles, aviation an shipping can meet the transportation requirement of network like, open urban agglomerations. In this work,the function mechanism of transportation on urban agglomeration's spatial organization was investigated; a creative and systematic analysis was performed on the nuclear fission-urban agglomeration's spatial organization based on UMT, the polynuclear symbiotic -urban agglomeration's spatial organization based on highway transportation and the network like, open urban agglomeration's spatial organization based on aviation and shipping. Using the Paris metropolitan area, Guangzhou, Shenzhen and Hong Kong and other cities as examples, an empirical analysis was performed on different inter-city transportation modes and urban agglomeration's spatial organization. Finally, empirical study was conducted on the spatial optimization of Jinan city and on the Mid-Shandong urban agglomeration's spatial organization centered at Jinan.
In summary, this work includes a progressive and systematic study from the inter-city transportation promoting the development of urban agglomeration, namely, the theoretical basis, to the three models for the evolution of urban agglomeration space, the to the dynamic mechanism of urban agglomeration development and the function mechanism of inter-city transportation to the evolution of urban agglomeration space,and finally to the urban agglomeration's spatial organization oriented by different modes of transportation. This research is important as a reference for the study of urban agglomeration's spatial organization and the mode selection of transportation in urban agglomeration.
引文
[1] 黄亚平．城市空间理论与空间分析．南京：东南大学出版社，2002
[2] 赵和生．城市规划与城市发展．南京：东南大学出版社，1999
[3] 王建国．现代城市设计理论与方法．南京：东南大学出版社，1991
[4] 张京祥．城镇群体空间组合．南京：东南大学出版社，2000
[5] 胡俊．中国城市：模式与演进．北京：中国建筑工业出版社，1995
[6] 唐子来．西方城市空间结构研究的理论与方法．城市规划汇刊，1997，(6)
[7] 孙施文．城市空间运行机制研究的方法论．城市规划汇刊，1999，(6)
[8] 王忆云．突破四度空间：网络时代的城市发展与规划．城市问题，1999，(4)
[9] 肖建莉．论知识经济时代社会与城市的若干发展趋势，城市规划，1999，(7)
[10] 石忆邵，张翔．城市郊区化研究述要．城市规划汇刊，1997，(3)
[11] 柴彦威．郊区化及其研究．经济地理，1995，(2)
[12] 石忆邵．从单中心城市到多中心城市——中国特大城市发展的空间组织模式．城市规划汇刊，1998，(2)
[13] 阎小培，郑莉．广州城市地域结构与规划研究．城市规划，1998，(1)
[14] 邹军等．城镇体系规划．南京：东南大学出版社，2002
[15] 朱英明．城市群经济空间分析．北京：科学出版社，2004
[16] 杨忠伟等．中国大都市郊区化．北京：化学工业出版社，2006
[17] 朱照宏等．城市群交通规划．上海：同济大学出版社，2006
[18] 谢守红．大都市区的空间组织．北京：科学出版社，2004
[19] 王乃静等．山东半岛城市群发展战略新探．北京：经济科学出版社，2005
[20] 朱熹钢．城市空间集中与分散论．北京：中国建筑工业出版社，2002
[21] 周一星．，孟延春．中国大城市的郊区化趋势．城市规划汇刊，1998(3)
[22] 郑静．论城市空间发展策略与广州“双城三极”空间策略．规划师，2000(16)
[23] 姚士谋等．中国的城市群．合肥：安徽科技出版社，1992
[24] 阎小培等．穗港澳都市连绵区的形成机制研究．地理研究，1997(2)
[25] 阎小培．信息产业与城市发展．北京：科学出版社，1999
[26] 武进．中国城市形态：结构、特征及其演变．南京：江苏科学技术出版社，1990
[27] 顾朝林．集聚与扩散——城市空间结构新论．南京：东南大学出版社，2000
[28] 张京祥．论都市圈地域空间组织．城市规划，2001，(5)
[29] 史育龙，周一星．关于大都市带研究的论争及进展述评．国外城市规划，1997(2)
[30] 陈甬军等．中国城市化：实证分析与对策研究．厦门：厦门大学出版社，2002
[31] 武友德等．区域经济学导论．北京：中国社会科学出版社，2004
[32] 顾强．中国产业集群．北京：机械工业出版社，2005
[33] 高洪深．区域经济学．北京：中国人民大学出版社，2002
[34] 陈秀山，张可云．区域经济理论．北京：商务印书馆，2002
[35] 梁琦．产业集聚论．北京：商务印书馆，2004
[36] 安虎森．区域经济学通论．北京：经济科学出版社，2004
[37] 左大培．内生稳态增长模型．北京：中国社会科学出版社，2005
[38] 金元欢，王建宇．区域经济学．杭州：浙江大学出版社，1997
[39] 王雅莉．城市化经济运行分析．上海：上海三联出版社，2004
[40] 侯景新、尹卫红．区域经济分析方法．北京：商务印书馆，2004
[41] 汪冬梅．中国城市化问题研究．北京：中国经济出版社，2005
[42] 黄文忠．上海卫星城与中国城市化道路．上海：上海人民出版社，2005
[43] 藤田昌久等著；刘峰等译．集聚经济学——城市、产业区位与区域增长．成都：西南财经大学出版社，2005
[44] 刘治彦．城市区域经哦南财经大学出版社，2004
[49] 党明德等．济南百年城市发展史——开埠以来的．济南：齐鲁书社，2004
[50] 彭辉，朱力争．综合交通运输系统及规划．成都：西南交通大学出版社，2006
[51] 陈修颖．区域空间结构重组——理论与实践研究．南京：东南大学出版社，2005
[52] 周涛．重庆市“半小时主城”交通规划介绍．城市交通，2002(1)
[53] 张国伍．交通运输系统分析．成都：西南交通大学出版社，1991
[54] 中国公路学会．2003年学术年会论文集．人民交通出版社，2003
[55] 白思俊．现代交通项目管理．机械工业出版社，2003
[56] 刘易斯·芒福德著，倪文彦、宋竣岭译．城市发展史——起源、演变和前景．北京：中国建筑工业出版社，1989
[57] 凯文·林奇著，林庆怡等译．城市形态．北京：华夏出版社，2001
[58] 凯文·林奇著，方益萍等译．城市设计．北京：华夏出版社，2001
[59] Peter Hall著，邹德慈等译．城市和区域规划．北京：中国建筑工业出版社，1985
[60] A．B．布宁著，黄海华译．城市建设艺术史．北京：中国建筑工业出版社，1992
[61] 莫什·萨夫迪著，吴越译．后汽车时代的城市．北京：人民文学出版社，2001
[62] 霍华德著，金经元译．明日的田园城市．北京：商务印书馆，2000
[63] 武进．中国城市形态：结构、特征及其演变．南京：江苏科学技术出版社，1990
[64] 文国玮．城市交通与道路系统规划．北京：清华大学出版社，2001
[65] 蔡君时．城市轨道交通．上海：同济大学出版社，2000
[66] 张志荣．都市捷运：发展与应用．天津大学出版社，2002
[67] 顾朝林等．集聚与扩散——城市空间结构新论．南京：东南大学出版社，2000
[68] 毛蒋兴、阎小培．城市土地利用模式与城市交通模式关系研究．规划师，2002(7)
[69] 徐永建、阎小培．西方国家城市交通系统与土地利用关系研究．城市规划，1999(11)
[70] 杨荫凯、金凤君．交通技术创新与城市空间形态的相应演变．地理学与国土研究，1992(2)
[71] 王成新等．交通模式对城市空间形态影响的实证分析——以南京都市圈城市为例]．地理与地理信息科学，2004(5)
[72] 官卫华、姚十谋．城市群空间发展演化态势研究——以福厦城市群为例．现代城市研究，2003(5)
[73] 潘海啸．大都市地区快速交通和城镇发展——国际经验和上海的研究．上海：同济大学出版社，2002
[74] 张京祥．城镇群体空间组合．南京：东南大学出版社，2000
[75] 江蔓琦．城市空间结构优化的经济分析．北京：人民出版社，2004
[76] 陆锡明等．大都市一体化交通．上海：上海科技出版社，2003
[77] 北京市城市规划设计研究院．世界大城市交通研究．北京：北京科学技术出版社，1991
[78] 杨荫凯．交通技术创新与城市空间形态的演变．城市问题，1999(2)
[79] 姚士谋等．高速公路与城镇发展的相互关系研究初探．经济地理．2001(3)
[80] 叶宝明等．论我国高速公路建设和发展，经济地理，1994(3)
[81] 郑弘毅．港口城市探索．南京：河海大学出版社，1991
[82] 周丽．城市发展轴与城市地理形态．经济地理．1986(3)
[83] 周翔民．城市轨道交通的发展趋势及其动因分析．城市轨道交通研究，2001(2)
[84] 朱锡金．城市的轴向发展．城市规划汇刊，1983(7)
[85] 段进．城市空间发展论．南京：江苏科学技术出版社，2003
[86] 柴彦威等．中国城市的时空间结构．北京：北京大学出版社，2002
[87] 冯健．转型期中国城市空间发展战略研究．北京：中国科学出版社，2003
[88] 郭鸿懋．城市空间经济学．北京：经济科学出版社，2002
[89] 潘海啸．城市交通方式和多模式间的转换．上海：同济大学出版社，2003
[90] 周干峙．发展我国大城市交通的研究．北京：中国建筑工业出版社，1997
[91] 陆化普．解析城市交通．北京：中国水利水电出版社，2001
[92] 王缉宪．国外城市土地用地与城市一体规划的方法与实践．国外城市规划，2001(1)
[93] 周立新．中国城市发展轨道交通系统条件的研究．2003年中国城市交通规划学术委员会论文集，2003
[94] 邱建华．交通方式的进步对城市空间结构、城市规划的影响．规划师，2002(7)
[95] 马强．近年来北美关于“TOD”的研究进展．国外城市规划，2003(5)
[96] 王宏伟．中国城市增长的空间组织模式研究．城市发展研究．2004(1)
[97] 戴帅等．山东半岛城市群的城际公路交通吸引研究．道路交通与安全，2006(2)
[98] 周曦．从“单核”到“多核”——城市发展模式初探．常州工学院学报，2005(2)
[99] 王开泳等．城市空间结构演变的空间过程和动力因子分析．云南地理环境研究，2004(4)
[100] 张春山．我国城市轨道交通发展方向研究．首都经济贸易大学硕士学位论文，2001
[101] 官莹．城市交通与城市空间形态．南京大学硕士学位论文，2003
[102] 费移山．城市形态与城市交通相关性研究．东南大学硕士学位论文，2003
[103] 陈翔云．快速轨道交通与城镇群发展相互关系研究．长安大学硕士论文，2005
[104] 王洁．杭州城市空间发展与道路交通相互关系研究．浙江大学硕士学位论文，2005
[105] 王会萍．可持续的大城市交通结构发展模式研究——以西安市为例．西北大学硕士学位论文，2004
[106] 张越．城市空间演进中的交通作用机制研究——探寻一种新的规划观念和方法．南京大学硕士研究生学位论文，1998
[107] 赵童．城市土地使用和交通系统相互作用的研究．同济大学博士研究生学位论文，2001
[108] Robert Cervero. Transit metropolis, a global inquiry. Washington D. C.: Island Press, 1998
[109] Watters R F. Asia-pacific: new geographies of the Pacific Rim. Vancouver: UBC press, 1997
[110] Warf B. Telecommunications and the changing geographies of knowledge transmission in the late 20th century. Urban Studies, 1995
[111] Wang F H. Modeling urban population densities in Beijing 1982-1990: suburbanization and its causes. Urban studies, 1999
[112] United nations. Urban Agglomerations 1996. New York: ST/ESA/SER, 1997
[113] The London Planning Advisory Committee. 1991. London: World City
[114] Kostof, Spiro. The city shaped urban patterns and meanings through history. London: Thamesand Hudson Ltd, 1991
[115] Kostof, Spiro. The city assembled the elements of urban form through history. London: Thamesand Hudson Ltd, 1992.
[116] Rapoport, Amos. Human aspects of urban form, towards a Man—Environment approach to urban form and design. New York: Pergamon Press, 1977
[117] Moms, E J. History of urban Form before the Industrial Revolutions. Harlow: Addison Wesley Longman Limited, 1994.
[118] Cervero, Robert. The transit metropolis, a global inquiry. Washington: Island Press, 1998.
[119] Southworth, Michael&Ben-Joseph, Eran. Streets and the shaping of towns and cities. New York: Mc Graw-Hil, 1996.
[120]Jacobs, Allan B. Great streets. MIT Press, 1995
[121]Jacobs, Jane. The death and life of great American cities. London: Jonathan Cape Thirty BedfordSquare, 1961
[122]Pucher, John and Lefevre, Christian. The urban transport crisis in Europe and North America. London: Macmillan Press LTD, 1996.
[123]Gallion Arthur B, Eisner, Simon. The urban pattern, city planning and design. New York: VanNosterand Reinhold, 1986
[124]C. Alexander. A city is not a tree. Architecture Forum, April&May, 1965
[125]Richards Brian. Transport in cites. London: Spon Press, 1990
[126]Richards, Brian. Future transport in cites. London: Spon Press, 2001
[127]Katz, Peter. The new Urbanism: Toward an architecture of community. New York: McGraw-Hill,1994
[128] Edited by Echenique, Marcial&Saint, Andrew. Cities for the new Millennium. London: Spon Press,2001.
[129]Edited by Jenks, Mike&Burton, Elizabeth. The compact city: a sustainable urban form? London:E& FN Spon, 1996.
[130]Newman, P&Kenworthy, J. Gasoline consumption and cities-a comparison of US cities with a global survey. Journal of the American planning Association, 1989/1
[131]Edited by Greg Pearce. Arup Hong Kong Station. London :Axel Menges, 2001
[132]Edited by Dimitriou, Harry&Cook Alison H. S. Land-use/ transport planning in Hong Kong: The end of an era. A review of principles and Practices. Brookfield: Ashgate Publishing Ltd, 1998
[133]Hawen Yi. North American transportation information. 2004
[134]Hill C. WL, Jones GR. Social change and sustainable transport journal of transport Geography.2004
[135]David E Bella. World transport research .Transport Management. 2004/2
[136]Smith A.D. Prospects for transport in the New Parliament Transportation Research, 2003
[137] Jim Simmons. A new deal for transport. Transport Policy, 2004/3
[138]Stephen J Shaw. Transport. University of North London. 2003
[139]Patrick McCarthy. Transportation Economics:theory and practice. Georgia Institute of Technology, 2002
[140]Hanwen, Thomas E. Mulinazzi. Methods and models for site impact trafic evaluation. Urban transportation. 2004
[2] 赵和生．城市规划与城市发展．南京：东南大学出版社，1999
[3] 王建国．现代城市设计理论与方法．南京：东南大学出版社，1991
[4] 张京祥．城镇群体空间组合．南京：东南大学出版社，2000
[5] 胡俊．中国城市：模式与演进．北京：中国建筑工业出版社，1995
[6] 唐子来．西方城市空间结构研究的理论与方法．城市规划汇刊，1997，(6)
[7] 孙施文．城市空间运行机制研究的方法论．城市规划汇刊，1999，(6)
[8] 王忆云．突破四度空间：网络时代的城市发展与规划．城市问题，1999，(4)
[9] 肖建莉．论知识经济时代社会与城市的若干发展趋势，城市规划，1999，(7)
[10] 石忆邵，张翔．城市郊区化研究述要．城市规划汇刊，1997，(3)
[11] 柴彦威．郊区化及其研究．经济地理，1995，(2)
[12] 石忆邵．从单中心城市到多中心城市——中国特大城市发展的空间组织模式．城市规划汇刊，1998，(2)
[13] 阎小培，郑莉．广州城市地域结构与规划研究．城市规划，1998，(1)
[14] 邹军等．城镇体系规划．南京：东南大学出版社，2002
[15] 朱英明．城市群经济空间分析．北京：科学出版社，2004
[16] 杨忠伟等．中国大都市郊区化．北京：化学工业出版社，2006
[17] 朱照宏等．城市群交通规划．上海：同济大学出版社，2006
[18] 谢守红．大都市区的空间组织．北京：科学出版社，2004
[19] 王乃静等．山东半岛城市群发展战略新探．北京：经济科学出版社，2005
[20] 朱熹钢．城市空间集中与分散论．北京：中国建筑工业出版社，2002
[21] 周一星．，孟延春．中国大城市的郊区化趋势．城市规划汇刊，1998(3)
[22] 郑静．论城市空间发展策略与广州“双城三极”空间策略．规划师，2000(16)
[23] 姚士谋等．中国的城市群．合肥：安徽科技出版社，1992
[24] 阎小培等．穗港澳都市连绵区的形成机制研究．地理研究，1997(2)
[25] 阎小培．信息产业与城市发展．北京：科学出版社，1999
[26] 武进．中国城市形态：结构、特征及其演变．南京：江苏科学技术出版社，1990
[27] 顾朝林．集聚与扩散——城市空间结构新论．南京：东南大学出版社，2000
[28] 张京祥．论都市圈地域空间组织．城市规划，2001，(5)
[29] 史育龙，周一星．关于大都市带研究的论争及进展述评．国外城市规划，1997(2)
[30] 陈甬军等．中国城市化：实证分析与对策研究．厦门：厦门大学出版社，2002
[31] 武友德等．区域经济学导论．北京：中国社会科学出版社，2004
[32] 顾强．中国产业集群．北京：机械工业出版社，2005
[33] 高洪深．区域经济学．北京：中国人民大学出版社，2002
[34] 陈秀山，张可云．区域经济理论．北京：商务印书馆，2002
[35] 梁琦．产业集聚论．北京：商务印书馆，2004
[36] 安虎森．区域经济学通论．北京：经济科学出版社，2004
[37] 左大培．内生稳态增长模型．北京：中国社会科学出版社，2005
[38] 金元欢，王建宇．区域经济学．杭州：浙江大学出版社，1997
[39] 王雅莉．城市化经济运行分析．上海：上海三联出版社，2004
[40] 侯景新、尹卫红．区域经济分析方法．北京：商务印书馆，2004
[41] 汪冬梅．中国城市化问题研究．北京：中国经济出版社，2005
[42] 黄文忠．上海卫星城与中国城市化道路．上海：上海人民出版社，2005
[43] 藤田昌久等著；刘峰等译．集聚经济学——城市、产业区位与区域增长．成都：西南财经大学出版社，2005
[44] 刘治彦．城市区域经哦南财经大学出版社，2004
[49] 党明德等．济南百年城市发展史——开埠以来的．济南：齐鲁书社，2004
[50] 彭辉，朱力争．综合交通运输系统及规划．成都：西南交通大学出版社，2006
[51] 陈修颖．区域空间结构重组——理论与实践研究．南京：东南大学出版社，2005
[52] 周涛．重庆市“半小时主城”交通规划介绍．城市交通，2002(1)
[53] 张国伍．交通运输系统分析．成都：西南交通大学出版社，1991
[54] 中国公路学会．2003年学术年会论文集．人民交通出版社，2003
[55] 白思俊．现代交通项目管理．机械工业出版社，2003
[56] 刘易斯·芒福德著，倪文彦、宋竣岭译．城市发展史——起源、演变和前景．北京：中国建筑工业出版社，1989
[57] 凯文·林奇著，林庆怡等译．城市形态．北京：华夏出版社，2001
[58] 凯文·林奇著，方益萍等译．城市设计．北京：华夏出版社，2001
[59] Peter Hall著，邹德慈等译．城市和区域规划．北京：中国建筑工业出版社，1985
[60] A．B．布宁著，黄海华译．城市建设艺术史．北京：中国建筑工业出版社，1992
[61] 莫什·萨夫迪著，吴越译．后汽车时代的城市．北京：人民文学出版社，2001
[62] 霍华德著，金经元译．明日的田园城市．北京：商务印书馆，2000
[63] 武进．中国城市形态：结构、特征及其演变．南京：江苏科学技术出版社，1990
[64] 文国玮．城市交通与道路系统规划．北京：清华大学出版社，2001
[65] 蔡君时．城市轨道交通．上海：同济大学出版社，2000
[66] 张志荣．都市捷运：发展与应用．天津大学出版社，2002
[67] 顾朝林等．集聚与扩散——城市空间结构新论．南京：东南大学出版社，2000
[68] 毛蒋兴、阎小培．城市土地利用模式与城市交通模式关系研究．规划师，2002(7)
[69] 徐永建、阎小培．西方国家城市交通系统与土地利用关系研究．城市规划，1999(11)
[70] 杨荫凯、金凤君．交通技术创新与城市空间形态的相应演变．地理学与国土研究，1992(2)
[71] 王成新等．交通模式对城市空间形态影响的实证分析——以南京都市圈城市为例]．地理与地理信息科学，2004(5)
[72] 官卫华、姚十谋．城市群空间发展演化态势研究——以福厦城市群为例．现代城市研究，2003(5)
[73] 潘海啸．大都市地区快速交通和城镇发展——国际经验和上海的研究．上海：同济大学出版社，2002
[74] 张京祥．城镇群体空间组合．南京：东南大学出版社，2000
[75] 江蔓琦．城市空间结构优化的经济分析．北京：人民出版社，2004
[76] 陆锡明等．大都市一体化交通．上海：上海科技出版社，2003
[77] 北京市城市规划设计研究院．世界大城市交通研究．北京：北京科学技术出版社，1991
[78] 杨荫凯．交通技术创新与城市空间形态的演变．城市问题，1999(2)
[79] 姚士谋等．高速公路与城镇发展的相互关系研究初探．经济地理．2001(3)
[80] 叶宝明等．论我国高速公路建设和发展，经济地理，1994(3)
[81] 郑弘毅．港口城市探索．南京：河海大学出版社，1991
[82] 周丽．城市发展轴与城市地理形态．经济地理．1986(3)
[83] 周翔民．城市轨道交通的发展趋势及其动因分析．城市轨道交通研究，2001(2)
[84] 朱锡金．城市的轴向发展．城市规划汇刊，1983(7)
[85] 段进．城市空间发展论．南京：江苏科学技术出版社，2003
[86] 柴彦威等．中国城市的时空间结构．北京：北京大学出版社，2002
[87] 冯健．转型期中国城市空间发展战略研究．北京：中国科学出版社，2003
[88] 郭鸿懋．城市空间经济学．北京：经济科学出版社，2002
[89] 潘海啸．城市交通方式和多模式间的转换．上海：同济大学出版社，2003
[90] 周干峙．发展我国大城市交通的研究．北京：中国建筑工业出版社，1997
[91] 陆化普．解析城市交通．北京：中国水利水电出版社，2001
[92] 王缉宪．国外城市土地用地与城市一体规划的方法与实践．国外城市规划，2001(1)
[93] 周立新．中国城市发展轨道交通系统条件的研究．2003年中国城市交通规划学术委员会论文集，2003
[94] 邱建华．交通方式的进步对城市空间结构、城市规划的影响．规划师，2002(7)
[95] 马强．近年来北美关于“TOD”的研究进展．国外城市规划，2003(5)
[96] 王宏伟．中国城市增长的空间组织模式研究．城市发展研究．2004(1)
[97] 戴帅等．山东半岛城市群的城际公路交通吸引研究．道路交通与安全，2006(2)
[98] 周曦．从“单核”到“多核”——城市发展模式初探．常州工学院学报，2005(2)
[99] 王开泳等．城市空间结构演变的空间过程和动力因子分析．云南地理环境研究，2004(4)
[100] 张春山．我国城市轨道交通发展方向研究．首都经济贸易大学硕士学位论文，2001
[101] 官莹．城市交通与城市空间形态．南京大学硕士学位论文，2003
[102] 费移山．城市形态与城市交通相关性研究．东南大学硕士学位论文，2003
[103] 陈翔云．快速轨道交通与城镇群发展相互关系研究．长安大学硕士论文，2005
[104] 王洁．杭州城市空间发展与道路交通相互关系研究．浙江大学硕士学位论文，2005
[105] 王会萍．可持续的大城市交通结构发展模式研究——以西安市为例．西北大学硕士学位论文，2004
[106] 张越．城市空间演进中的交通作用机制研究——探寻一种新的规划观念和方法．南京大学硕士研究生学位论文，1998
[107] 赵童．城市土地使用和交通系统相互作用的研究．同济大学博士研究生学位论文，2001
[108] Robert Cervero. Transit metropolis, a global inquiry. Washington D. C.: Island Press, 1998
[109] Watters R F. Asia-pacific: new geographies of the Pacific Rim. Vancouver: UBC press, 1997
[110] Warf B. Telecommunications and the changing geographies of knowledge transmission in the late 20th century. Urban Studies, 1995
[111] Wang F H. Modeling urban population densities in Beijing 1982-1990: suburbanization and its causes. Urban studies, 1999
[112] United nations. Urban Agglomerations 1996. New York: ST/ESA/SER, 1997
[113] The London Planning Advisory Committee. 1991. London: World City
[114] Kostof, Spiro. The city shaped urban patterns and meanings through history. London: Thamesand Hudson Ltd, 1991
[115] Kostof, Spiro. The city assembled the elements of urban form through history. London: Thamesand Hudson Ltd, 1992.
[116] Rapoport, Amos. Human aspects of urban form, towards a Man—Environment approach to urban form and design. New York: Pergamon Press, 1977
[117] Moms, E J. History of urban Form before the Industrial Revolutions. Harlow: Addison Wesley Longman Limited, 1994.
[118] Cervero, Robert. The transit metropolis, a global inquiry. Washington: Island Press, 1998.
[119] Southworth, Michael&Ben-Joseph, Eran. Streets and the shaping of towns and cities. New York: Mc Graw-Hil, 1996.
[120]Jacobs, Allan B. Great streets. MIT Press, 1995
[121]Jacobs, Jane. The death and life of great American cities. London: Jonathan Cape Thirty BedfordSquare, 1961
[122]Pucher, John and Lefevre, Christian. The urban transport crisis in Europe and North America. London: Macmillan Press LTD, 1996.
[123]Gallion Arthur B, Eisner, Simon. The urban pattern, city planning and design. New York: VanNosterand Reinhold, 1986
[124]C. Alexander. A city is not a tree. Architecture Forum, April&May, 1965
[125]Richards Brian. Transport in cites. London: Spon Press, 1990
[126]Richards, Brian. Future transport in cites. London: Spon Press, 2001
[127]Katz, Peter. The new Urbanism: Toward an architecture of community. New York: McGraw-Hill,1994
[128] Edited by Echenique, Marcial&Saint, Andrew. Cities for the new Millennium. London: Spon Press,2001.
[129]Edited by Jenks, Mike&Burton, Elizabeth. The compact city: a sustainable urban form? London:E& FN Spon, 1996.
[130]Newman, P&Kenworthy, J. Gasoline consumption and cities-a comparison of US cities with a global survey. Journal of the American planning Association, 1989/1
[131]Edited by Greg Pearce. Arup Hong Kong Station. London :Axel Menges, 2001
[132]Edited by Dimitriou, Harry&Cook Alison H. S. Land-use/ transport planning in Hong Kong: The end of an era. A review of principles and Practices. Brookfield: Ashgate Publishing Ltd, 1998
[133]Hawen Yi. North American transportation information. 2004
[134]Hill C. WL, Jones GR. Social change and sustainable transport journal of transport Geography.2004
[135]David E Bella. World transport research .Transport Management. 2004/2
[136]Smith A.D. Prospects for transport in the New Parliament Transportation Research, 2003
[137] Jim Simmons. A new deal for transport. Transport Policy, 2004/3
[138]Stephen J Shaw. Transport. University of North London. 2003
[139]Patrick McCarthy. Transportation Economics:theory and practice. Georgia Institute of Technology, 2002
[140]Hanwen, Thomas E. Mulinazzi. Methods and models for site impact trafic evaluation. Urban transportation. 2004