《外文翻译---边缘生态：城乡景观生态.doc》由会员分享，可在线阅读，更多相关《外文翻译---边缘生态：城乡景观生态.doc（20页珍藏版）》请在三一文库上搜索。
1、外文翻译一 观生态一边缘生态：城乡景Ecology on the edge: Landscape and ecology between town and countrySybrand P TjallingiiAbstractThe trends are world wide: people and goods are increasingly mobile, compact cities develop into urban networks, industrializing agriculture is becoming footloose, rural life becomes urba
2、n life in a green setting. Social segregation, traffic nuisance, urban sprawl and other unwanted impacts of these trends challenge urban and regional planners. The search for planning answers to these issues is further complicated by the need for sustainable development at a global scale. What is th
3、e role of ecology in the context of the discussions on the future of town and country? The traditional, and still dominant, approach is based on the polarity of urban and rural worlds. In this perspective, ecology focuses on the c nature5 of protected areas and biodiversity. The papers in this speci
4、al issue explore the prospects of a wider perspective inwhich natural processes are seen as basic to both， rural and urban development. This article is digging up the fundamental 'discourses5 underlying the two approaches to ecology and nature. Firstly, the c object-oriented9 and "process o
5、 riented5discoursesareanalyzed. Secondly， the prospects of a process-oriented discourse are illustrated with plans for the Dutch Randstad and the German Ruhr area Then, some new concepts are introduced that may strengthen the institutional conditions for the process-oriented approach Discourses, con
6、cepts, plans and projects all circle around the central question in this article about the role of ecology in planning the edge of the city.KeywordsUrban and regional planning;Ecology;Discourses;City edge1. IntroductionLandscape ecology may be taken in a strict or in a broad sense. The strict interp
7、retation, most popular in the International Association of Landscape Ecology and its associated organizations focuses on habitats andand animals atpapers in thispopulation dynamics of plants the scale of landscapes. The special issue cross the edge of this strict interpretation and engage in a broad
8、 approach of the classical definition of ecology: the interaction between living organisms and their environmente This broad view places economy.sociology and ecology at the same level as complementary approaches to the study of man-environment interactions. As the papers in this issue demonstrate,
9、the broad approach offers meaningful context studies, both to social and economic researchers and to landscape ecologisfs sensu stricto. First of all, however, the need for a broad approach emerges from local and regional practice, where planners are challenged by the dynamic nature of urban-rural i
10、nteractions.The papers in this issue were presented at a workshop on urban-rural interactions during the 1997 conference of the Dutch Association for Landscape Ecology and this explains the emphasis on the Ramstad Holland and other Dutch issues in most, but not all，of the articles.The issue opens wi
11、th two reflections on basic discourses framing theory and practice of town and country planning. The following three papers are based on analytical research and explore biological, psychological and economic aspects of urbanizing landscapes. In the third and last part of this issue, three planning a
12、nd design studies deal with plans at different scales: house and garden, built-up and green areas in a city and，finally, infrastructure planning at a regional scale.A more prominent role of ecology is becoming self-evident in planning and design of urban and rural areas. By no means evident, however
13、; is the meaning of ecology. To some，the presence of green areas is the central topic，to others managingand recycling is the heart of the matter and yet others think the lifestyle of actors is the real issue. To architects and to many others, the first question about ecology is， perhaps: is it form
14、or function? The focus of this paper is on the edge of the city and, in general, on urban-rural interactions. Here, the central question is: what does ecology have to offer to the local planner? More precisely: how useful is ecological knowledge in the context of accommodating and steering 指导 urbani
15、zation processes and rural development? The situation is far from clear. Does an ecological approach to planning lead to compact central cities，as the Commission of the European Communities (CEC) states in its Green paper on the Urban Environment5 (Commission of the European Communities, 1990)? Or i
16、s the real message of ecology “that the city must be unmade by the unmaking of its boundaries/5 implying both, greening the cities and urbanizing the countryside (Nicholson Lord, 1987: p. 211)?In search for answers to these questions, I will first turn to an underlying layer of ecology interpretatio
17、ns and describe two ecology discourses. First, the focus is on the traditional, and still dominant, discourse on ecology, in which town and country are considered as expressions of the culture-nature polarity. In this view, nature is taken as an object, an area or a species Then, an emerging alterna
18、tive discourse is introduced, that may be called ecological modernization and takes natural processes as its point of departure. If nature is an object, then nature is something to possess. If nature is a process, then nature is something that acts.I describe the two approaches as discourses to eluc
19、idate the conceptual 概念的 and practical context of different ways of seeing that lead to contrasting actions. In modern sociology and planning theory, discourse analysis is developed to unravel the ideas, concepts and categorizations contained and reproduced in language (Hajer, 1996: 44). The approac
20、h is rooted in the work of Foucault, Giddens and others and is based on the assumption that our understanding of the material reality is constructed discursively (Jacobs, 1999: p. 203). Recently, discourse analysis has become an important instrument in research on urban change (Hastings, 1999) and o
21、n urban-rural interactions (Hidding et al，2000). In Hajer5s approach (Hajer, 1996: pp. 58-65)，typically, different actors who may support a collection of ideas for different reason form discourse coalitions. These coalitions may change, as discourses are susceptible to change In this view, on the on
22、e hand, discourse is not merely a function of power; it is not a passive tool in the hands of vested group interests. On the other hand，discourse is neither a fixed language linked to deeply held belief systems such as convictions about the role of the market or the state Discourse construction and
23、reconstruction results from the interaction between human agency and social structures in a changing world The two ecology discourses have different potentials both for problem and solution flnding. Subsequent sections of this article will illustrate this with a number of current issues in urban rur
24、al interaction, and with a number of plans and projects from the Randstad and Ruhr metropolitan areas As I will demonstrate, the ecology discourse that takes nature as an object is deeply rooted in institutional structures, but its potential to address fundamental issues is limited. The process-orie
25、nted discourse, however, has promising prospects, but its institutional base is weak.After these examples I discuss two conceptual tools aiming at improving the institutional structure for a process-oriented approach to regional planning. The forum-pilot-project strategy focuses on the structural ba
26、sis for a prominent role of learning from projects and plans. This comprises the strategy of the two networks This strategic concept takes the water and traffic networks as carrying structures for the zoning of functions usually called urban and rural.In Section 6,1 will return to the questions rais
27、ed at the start and make some general recommendations on the role of ecology in urban-rural planning and, more specifically in planning the edge of the city.2. Ecology discourses2.1. The traditional discourse: nature as an objectAccording to a common view, nature starts where the city ends. Here, on
28、 the edge of the city， lies the boundary between culture and nature, between red and greenthat is: between the built environment and untouched landscape. Of course, there are trees and parks in the city，and， of course, the countryside is not as wild as it used to be，but these observations do not see
29、m to affect the dominant view: the city is the enemy of nature and the front-line is the edge of the city. In this line of thinking, all building is bad. If urban nature has a meaning, it could only refer to the study of wildlife in some less densely built urban environments This way of thinking has
30、 practical advantages for those who share it. Politicians are attracted by the idea that paying attention to ecology means creating a concrete nature reserve near the city. Architects like to think in the polarity between the wild and the beautifully designed and it seems logical to discuss it as th
31、e polarity between nature and culture Biologists are attracted by the idea that they are the professional ecologists with nature as their object. Environmentalists are inclined to use this language to defend the countryside against urbanizationIn this traditional discourse, ecology is tied to the na
32、ture of protected areas and wildlife species. In this interpretation, ecology is object-oriented. In operational planning too, the object character of nature is an advantage Nature areas can be bought and fenced and budgets for maintenance can be allocated. Wild species can be protected by specific
33、measures, proposed by specialists working in special departments The division of labor is clear: the sector departments for social affairs, economic affairs, housing and nature have different specialists, who defend their territories Thus, in this context nature is part of a spatially and functional
34、ly separated world2.2. An emerging discourse: nature as a processIn the 18th century, already, "the growth of towns had led to a new longing for the countryside. for unsubdued nature59 (Thomas, 1983). This led to the concept of nature as an object invented by citizens but separated from cities.
35、 In this discourse, that in the 20th century became the dominant way of seeing, man and nature are kept separate, both in the minds of people and in our landscapes As a result, nature has also been separated from production economy and this leads to the paradox thatnature has to be paid for from the
36、 revenues of a polluting economy. The chimney must smoke to save the forest! As we live in one world, however, there is no lasting prospect for this separation of functions. In other words: protecting islands of nature in a highly cultivated landscape is not a sustainable approach This is not to say
37、 any functional separation is to be rejected “Goodas a well-knownno good fencesfences make good neighbors/9 saying goes. Alas，there are against air pollution or contaminated groundwater.边缘生态：城乡景观生态森朴若安恰林基摘要:全球趋势:人与货物的流动性越来越高，紧凑的城市发展成为城市网络，农业产业化变得越来越普及, 农村的生活成为一个绿色的城市生活环境。社会隔离，交通公害，和这些趋势带来的其他的未曾想到的影
38、响挑战若城市区域规划者们.在全球范围内实现可持续发展的襦要，使得对于这些问题的解决方法的规划 研究进一步复杂化。在讨论城市和乡村的未來的背最下，生态学扮演怎样的角色呢?传统的、仍占主导地 位的方式是基于城市和农村的反向性.从这个角度来看，生态重点在于保护区的天然性和生物的多样性。 在这个特殊问题方面的论文，用更广阔的视野探讨将自然过程视为城乡发展的基础这一前景。本文致力于 挖拥出瞪藏在自然生态背后的基本“模式”。第一，分析“实物导向”和“过程导向”性论述。第二，过 程导向性的前景是以荷兰任仕达和德国鲁尔区的规划为例进行的详述。第三，引入一些新的概念，可以为 “过程导向”方式增强制度条件.在这篇
39、文章中，所有的论述，概念，计划和项目都是围绕生态学在城市 边缘规划中所起到的作用这一中心问题而展开的.关键词：城市和区域规划 生态学 论述 城市边缘1.引言景观生态学有狭义和广义两方面的解释。狭义的解释，即景观生态学国际协会和相关组织中 最受推崇的是，在景观范围内侧重于植物和动物 的栖息地和种群动态的研究。就这个特殊的问 题，这篇论文跨过狭义的解释，用更广阔的视野 研究生态学的经典定义：生物与环境之间的相互 作用。这个广阔的视野将经济、社会和生态学放 在同一水平下，作为互补的方式去研究人与环境 之间的相互作用。在这个问题上，论文表明，广 义的方法提供了有意义的背景研究，严格的讲是 对社会和经济
40、的研究人员和景观生态学家来说。 但是首先，广义的方法需要从地方和区域实践中 获得，也就是规划师面临城乡之间相互作用的动 态性质的挑战的地方。在这个问题上的论文，是在城市-农村相互 作用的一个专题研讨会上，即1997年荷兰景观 生态协会会议期间提出了的，解释并强调任仕达 荷兰和其他荷兰问题，但不是所有的条款这个问题以思考城乡规划基本的理论框架 和实践展开，接下来的文章以系统的研究为基 础，探索城市化过程中景观的生物学，心理学和 经济学层面的作用。这篇文章的第三段和最后一部分，就这个问题，提出了三个不同尺度方面的 规划设计研究解决方案：房屋与花园，城市建设 与绿地面积，还有特定区域范围内的基础建设
41、规 划。在城乡地区的规划设计中，生态学的突出地位变 得更显而易见。没有所谓的证据，但是，这就是 生态学的意义。一些人认为，绿地面积的呈现是 中心话题，一些认为，治理流畅和循环利用是问 题的关键，而另一些人认为人们的生活方式才是 真正的关键点。对建筑师和很多其他人来说，关 于生态，首要的问题可能是：它是作为一种功能 还是只是摆设？这篇文章的焦点是城市的边缘 地带，综合的说，就是城乡之间的相互作用。中 心的问题是：生态学能为地区规划者们提供什 么？更准确的讲：在帮助和指导城市化进程和农 村发展的背景中，生态学方面的知识有什么用？ 目前的形式还不是很明确。难道用生态学方法去 规划，能够形成更简化的中
42、心城市？就像欧盟委 员会在它的城市环境绿皮书上所陈述的那样O（欧盟委员会，1990）或者说是生态学的真正的 使命“城市一定会因城市边界的瓦解而毁灭” 有两方面的意思，是城市乡村化，乡村城市化。为了寻找这些问题的答案，我首先去査找对 生态学深层面的解释，然后写出了两个生态学论 述。第一 ,重点在传统的并且仍占主导地位的，关于生态 学方面的论述，城市和乡村被视为文化与自然对 立的表现。在这个观点中，自然被看做一个对象, 一片区域或者一个种类。第二，一个相关的论述 被引进来，可以称为生态现代化，把自然化进程 作为它的出发点。如果自然是一个目标，那就意 味着去拥有，如果自然是一个过程，那就需要去 表现
43、我把这两种方式作为论点，来阐明概念的和 实际环境中的不同方法，看看它们的功能对比。在现代社会学和规划理论当中，论述分析已经发 展成为阐明思想，概念和包含语言的复制和分门 别类。这个方法产生于福柯，吉登斯和其他人的 作品，是基于这样的假设：我们对物质世界的理 解是推论性的构建出来的（雅各布斯，1990：p203）。近年来，论述分析已经成为研究城市变化（黑斯廷斯,1999）和城乡之间相互作用的重 要手段（海斯汀，2000）o用杰尔的方法，通常 情况下，不同的演员可能会主张思想的集合，因 为不同的理由形成论述的联盟。这些连接可能会 改变，因为论述很容易改变。从这个方面看，一 方面论述不仅仅是权力的功
44、能。在掌控既定的群 体利益中，它并不是一个消极的工具。另一方面, 论述既不是连接根深蒂固的信仰体系的固定语 言，如对市场的作用或国家的信念。话语的构建 与重建是在变化中的世界，人类能动性与社会结 构融合的结果。这两种生态论述对发现问题和寻找解决方 法具有不同的潜在力量。本文的后续部分将会用 城乡互动下的一些当下问题来结束这个结论，包 括任仕达和鲁尔都市地区的一些计划和项目O我 将证明，生态话语，把自然作为对象是深深植根 于制度结构，但是它解决基本问题的潜力是有限 的。然而，面向过程的论述是具有广阔的发展前 景的，但是其制度基础薄弱。在这些例子之后， 我将讨论两个概念工具，针对目前面向过程的区
45、域规划方法的制度结构。论坛-试点项目的战略 重点从项目和计划学习重要的作用的结构基础O 这包括两网络策略。这一战略的概念，以水和交 通网络作为承载结构的通常称为农村和城市功 能区划。在第6部分，我将回到开始时提出的问题，对城 市-农村规划的生态作用和一些一般性的建议, 特别是在规划城市的边缘2.生态学论述2.1传统的观点：自然作为目标根据普遍的观点，自然开始于城市结束的地方。这里，在城市的边缘，存在着文化和自然的 边界，红色与绿色的边界，那就是：在建筑环境 与未被开发的景观之间。当然，城市中有树木和 公园，而且乡村也不想它以前那样原生态，但是 这些观察到的似乎并不影响主要的视野：城市是 自然的
46、敌人，战线就是城市的边缘。在这个界限 中思考，所有的建筑都是不好的。如果城市的性 质有一个意义，他可能只涉及到在不那么密集的 城市建设环境中研究野生生物。这种思考方式对 一些享受这样环境的人们来说有现实性的优点。 政治家被这样的观点所吸引，关注生态意味着在 城市附近制造一个具体的自然保护区。建筑师们 可能会想未开发的地方与设计漂亮的地方的对 立，这个似乎会联想到把它作为自然与文明之间 的对立的讨论。生物学家持有这样的观点，他们 是把自然作为他们的对象的专业的生态学家。环 境学家倾向于使用他们的语言去攻击城市捍卫 乡村。在这样的传统论述中，生态学与保护地区自然 和野生生物物种联系在一起。这样的解
47、释，生态 学是目标导向的。在操作性规划中也是这样的， 自然的对象特性是一个优势。自然地区可以购买 然后用围起来，维护的预算费用可以分摊。在相 关部门工作的专家提议，野生物种可以通过具体 的措施进行保护。劳动分工是明确的：社会事务 部门，经济事务部门，住房和自然部门都有自己 的专家来捍卫他们的领土。因此，在这种情况下, 自然是一个空间和功能分离的世界的一部分。2. 2新的论述：自然是过程早在18世纪，“城镇的发展导致了对新农村 的渴望渴望一个未被征服的自然”。这导致了 自然的概念被作为一个对象，由城市产生又从城 市中分离出来。在本文的研究中，20世纪的主 要观察方式就是：人与自然是分开的。在我们的 思想中和我们的景观中。结果，自然也已经从生 产经济中分离，这导致了自然要由污染经济的收 入来支出的悖论。烟囱必须吸烟来拯救森林！我 们生活在一个世界，然而，这种分离功能没有持 久的前景。换句话说，用高强度耕种风景区的方 法来保护自然岛屿是不是一个可持续的方法。这 并不是说任何功能的分离都是不可取的。正如一 个著名的谚语，“好篱笆造就好邻居”。唉，却没 有一个阻挡被污染的空气和地下水的篱笆。