自然资源学报 ›› 2020, Vol. 35 ›› Issue (10): 2311-2324.doi: 10.31497/zrzyxb.20201002

• 面向国土空间规划的"双评价":理论与实践 • 上一篇    下一篇

科学理性与决策机制:“双评价”与国土空间规划的思考

杨帆1, 宗立2, 沈珏琳1, 刘乐峰1   

  1. 1.同济大学建筑与城市规划学院城市规划系,上海 200092;
    2.上海同济城市规划设计研究院,上海 200092
  • 收稿日期:2020-04-27 修回日期:2020-07-01 出版日期:2020-10-28 发布日期:2020-12-28
  • 作者简介:杨帆(1968- ),男,河南漯河人,博士,副教授,主要从事城乡规划与公共政策研究。E-mail: fanyangsh@tongji.edu.cn
  • 基金资助:
    国家自然科学基金项目(51778436)

Scientific rational orientation and decision-making support orientation: The thinking of "double evaluation" and territorial spatial planning

YANG Fan1, ZONG Li2, SHEN Jue-lin1, LIU Le-feng1   

  1. 1. College of Architecture and Urban Planning, Tongji University, Shanghai 200092, China;
    2. Shanghai Tongji Urban Planning & Design Institute, Shanghai 200092, China
  • Received:2020-04-27 Revised:2020-07-01 Online:2020-10-28 Published:2020-12-28

摘要: “双评价”是国土空间规划体系具有前置和基础性作用的制度设定与技术基础。结合实践案例对“试行指南”进行理论思考,结果发现:“双评价”的技术、逻辑路径内含有科学问题和假设;同时,对制度建构具有约束和纠偏作用。“双评价”发挥有效作用需兼顾科学性和政策性,也因此难以两全齐美。技术方法和数据方面存在“加合困境”“分解困境”和“排序困境”。合理有效的“双评价”需要提高两个评价内容的技术合理性,并通过两者耦合进一步提升合理性。也要充分适应决策机制与主体目标,认识科学研究与决策支持研究之间的差异,根据不同层级地方政府事权层级和分工关系优化分析评价方法。结论对“双评价”定位优化与技术逻辑改进有实践指导意义。

关键词: "双评价", 科学研究, 决策机制, 技术路径, 国土空间规划

Abstract: "Double evaluation" is the system setting and technical foundation of territorial spatial planning system. Based on the practical cases, this paper gives theoretical reflection on the Trial Guide. The results show that the scientific questions and hypotheses are constructed into the technological and logical paths of "double evaluation". Meanwhile, "double evaluation" exerts its impact by constraint and correction of planning system institutional construction. "Double evaluation" plays an effective role when it combines science and policy, but it is difficult for both sides to be perfect. This kind of problem on technical methodology and data aspects can be interpreted as "add-on dilemma", "decomposition dilemma" and "sorting dilemma". To achieve a reasonable and effective "double evaluation", it is necessary to improve the technical rationality and coupling of the evaluation content. Meanwhile, through the understanding of the difference between scientific research and decision support research, based on full adaptation to decision-making mechanisms and subject objectives, the evaluation method should be optimized according to the hierarchy and arrangement of governmental authorities. The conclusion of this paper is of practical significance to the position optimization and technical logic improvement of "double evaluation".

Key words: "double evaluation", scientific research, decision making mechanism, technical path, territorial spatial planning