产权制度与土地性质改造过程中上海里弄街区城市功能再定位的思考
|
摘要
以现代都市遗产保护和社区发展的双重困境为切入点,引出"遗产社区"的概念。同时以上海石库门里弄为研究对象,从历史向度追溯遗产社区在产权制度方面遭遇的困境,并在此基础上评析当前形态学对石库门里弄改造的研究。指出目前以形态学为基础的石库门里弄改造存在论述范式上的认知缺陷,建议从制度经济学层面探索其改造模式。在对石库门里弄改造面临的三大制度困境进行剖析之后,从产权配置多样化的视角提出四种基于不同的产权形式和用地方式的改造模式,认为通过多维改造体系构建自主化的选择平台,是协调政府、市场与个人三方权责关系,实现遗产社区保护与发展的共赢之道。
Based on the duplex dilemmas of heritage preservation and community development faced by modern cities,the article introduces a novel conception of 'heritage community' and points out such a concept can help diverting the research focus on historical precinct from physical space to social aspects. Subsequently,the article takes Shanghai historic lane neighborhood as example to demonstrate the institutional dilemma of property structure faced by heritage communities from the historical dimension. Through the evaluation and analysis of current researches on Shikumen transformations,the article believes there are prominently cognitive defects on the theory of Shikumen transformation models,which are pervasively set up from morphology levels. Therefore,by dissecting three categories of institutional conundrums witnessed by the transformation of Shikumen lane neighborhoods,the article suggests to reexamine the transformation models from institutional levels which focus on the redistribution of property rights. As a result,it initiates four brand-new transformation models based on the combination of different property ownership and land usage from a diversified perspective of reapportioning the property structure. Finally,it concludes establishing an autonomous negotiation and empowerment platform is essential to meaningful citizen participation and the collaboration of different stakeholders,which can consequently result in the win-win scenario of the preservation and development of heritage communities.
Based on the duplex dilemmas of heritage preservation and community development faced by modern cities,the article introduces a novel conception of 'heritage community' and points out such a concept can help diverting the research focus on historical precinct from physical space to social aspects. Subsequently,the article takes Shanghai historic lane neighborhood as example to demonstrate the institutional dilemma of property structure faced by heritage communities from the historical dimension. Through the evaluation and analysis of current researches on Shikumen transformations,the article believes there are prominently cognitive defects on the theory of Shikumen transformation models,which are pervasively set up from morphology levels. Therefore,by dissecting three categories of institutional conundrums witnessed by the transformation of Shikumen lane neighborhoods,the article suggests to reexamine the transformation models from institutional levels which focus on the redistribution of property rights. As a result,it initiates four brand-new transformation models based on the combination of different property ownership and land usage from a diversified perspective of reapportioning the property structure. Finally,it concludes establishing an autonomous negotiation and empowerment platform is essential to meaningful citizen participation and the collaboration of different stakeholders,which can consequently result in the win-win scenario of the preservation and development of heritage communities.
引文
[1] Labadi S, Logan W. Urban Heritage Development and Sustainability:International Frameworks, National and Local Governance[M]. NY:Routledge,2016.
[2] Lefebvre H. The Urban Revolution[M]. Minneapolis:University of Minnesota Press,2003.
[3]邵甬.从“历史风貌保护”到“城市遗产保护”:论上海历史文化名城保护[J].上海城市规划,2016(5):1-8.
[4]钟晓华.遗产社区的社会抗逆力:风险管理视角下的城市遗产保护[J].城市发展研究,2016,23(2):23-29.
[5] Bandarin F,Oers R V. Reconnecting The City:The Historic Urban Landscape Approach and The Future of Urban Heritage[M]. Chichester:Wiley Blackwell,2014.
[6] Labadi S. UNESCO, Cultural Heritage, and Outstanding Universal Value[M]. Plymouth:Alta Mira Press,2013.
[7]刘刚. 1958年前后上海石库门里弄社区的城市改造[J].新建筑,2017(6):30-34.
[8]赵胜.上海城市私房的社会主义改造[J].当代中国史研究,2010,17(5):66-73.
[9]陆文达.上海房地产志[M].上海:上海社会科学院出版社,1999.
[10] Zhou X. Community Preservation and Renovation within Limitation:Study on the Revitalization of Shanghai Shikumen Lane Neighborhood Based on the Symbiosis of Multidimensional Values[D]. Tokyo:The University of Tokyo,2018.
[11]邵甬,王丽丽.产权制度下遗产保护与居住改善策略探讨:以上海公有居住类遗产为例[J].城市规划,2016,40(12):73-80.
[12]常青.旧改中的上海建筑及其都市历史语境[J].建筑学报,2009(10):23-28.
[13]朱晓明,古小英.上海石库门里弄保护与更新的4类案例评析[J].住宅科技,2010,30(6):25-29.
[14]钟晓华,周俭.遗产在城市更新中的角色演变:解读上海中心城区“旧改”进程中的三个案例[J].城乡规划,2012(1):113-120.
[15]陈青长.基于共生原理的上海里弄再生探索[D].上海:同济大学,2011.
[16]周详,窪田亚矢.介置、转置、原置、重置与并置:上海石库门公共消费空间重塑对里弄社区空间的影响[J].新建筑,2018(1):130-134.
[17] Martinez P G. Urban authenticity at stake:A new framework for its definition from the perspective of heritage at the Shanghai Music Valley[J]. Cities,2017,70(6):55-64.
[18]周详,窪田亚矢.国与家之间:论上海里弄街区日常生活空间的断裂与统一[J].风景园林,2018(4):34-40.
[19]刘刚.上海石库门里弄的存废[J].建筑遗产,2016(4):1-11.
[20]王信,陈迅.历史建筑保护和开发的制度经济学探讨[J].同济大学学报(社会科学版),2004,15(5):97-102.
[21]肖建莉.论历史建筑保护与利用的市场化运作[J].旧区改造,2004,2(3):31-35.
[22]郭湘闽.房屋产权私有化是拯救旧城的灵丹妙药吗[J].城市规划,2007,31(1):9-15.
[23]李世庆.双维度产权视角下论我国历史街区的保护策略[J].城市规划,2007,31(12):31-36.
[24]张晨杰.上海里弄建筑的保护困境与政策研究建议[J].现代城市研究,2016(12):121-126.
[25]李彦伯.上海里弄街区的空间-社会复合体价值研究[D].上海:同济大学,2010.
[26]张庭伟.城市的两重性和规划理论问题[J].城市规划,2001(1):49-52.
[2] Lefebvre H. The Urban Revolution[M]. Minneapolis:University of Minnesota Press,2003.
[3]邵甬.从“历史风貌保护”到“城市遗产保护”:论上海历史文化名城保护[J].上海城市规划,2016(5):1-8.
[4]钟晓华.遗产社区的社会抗逆力:风险管理视角下的城市遗产保护[J].城市发展研究,2016,23(2):23-29.
[5] Bandarin F,Oers R V. Reconnecting The City:The Historic Urban Landscape Approach and The Future of Urban Heritage[M]. Chichester:Wiley Blackwell,2014.
[6] Labadi S. UNESCO, Cultural Heritage, and Outstanding Universal Value[M]. Plymouth:Alta Mira Press,2013.
[7]刘刚. 1958年前后上海石库门里弄社区的城市改造[J].新建筑,2017(6):30-34.
[8]赵胜.上海城市私房的社会主义改造[J].当代中国史研究,2010,17(5):66-73.
[9]陆文达.上海房地产志[M].上海:上海社会科学院出版社,1999.
[10] Zhou X. Community Preservation and Renovation within Limitation:Study on the Revitalization of Shanghai Shikumen Lane Neighborhood Based on the Symbiosis of Multidimensional Values[D]. Tokyo:The University of Tokyo,2018.
[11]邵甬,王丽丽.产权制度下遗产保护与居住改善策略探讨:以上海公有居住类遗产为例[J].城市规划,2016,40(12):73-80.
[12]常青.旧改中的上海建筑及其都市历史语境[J].建筑学报,2009(10):23-28.
[13]朱晓明,古小英.上海石库门里弄保护与更新的4类案例评析[J].住宅科技,2010,30(6):25-29.
[14]钟晓华,周俭.遗产在城市更新中的角色演变:解读上海中心城区“旧改”进程中的三个案例[J].城乡规划,2012(1):113-120.
[15]陈青长.基于共生原理的上海里弄再生探索[D].上海:同济大学,2011.
[16]周详,窪田亚矢.介置、转置、原置、重置与并置:上海石库门公共消费空间重塑对里弄社区空间的影响[J].新建筑,2018(1):130-134.
[17] Martinez P G. Urban authenticity at stake:A new framework for its definition from the perspective of heritage at the Shanghai Music Valley[J]. Cities,2017,70(6):55-64.
[18]周详,窪田亚矢.国与家之间:论上海里弄街区日常生活空间的断裂与统一[J].风景园林,2018(4):34-40.
[19]刘刚.上海石库门里弄的存废[J].建筑遗产,2016(4):1-11.
[20]王信,陈迅.历史建筑保护和开发的制度经济学探讨[J].同济大学学报(社会科学版),2004,15(5):97-102.
[21]肖建莉.论历史建筑保护与利用的市场化运作[J].旧区改造,2004,2(3):31-35.
[22]郭湘闽.房屋产权私有化是拯救旧城的灵丹妙药吗[J].城市规划,2007,31(1):9-15.
[23]李世庆.双维度产权视角下论我国历史街区的保护策略[J].城市规划,2007,31(12):31-36.
[24]张晨杰.上海里弄建筑的保护困境与政策研究建议[J].现代城市研究,2016(12):121-126.
[25]李彦伯.上海里弄街区的空间-社会复合体价值研究[D].上海:同济大学,2010.
[26]张庭伟.城市的两重性和规划理论问题[J].城市规划,2001(1):49-52.