序一
武廷海同志的新著出版,有两个方面我至感欣喜。
一方面是本书的学术与理论价值。本书从鸦片战争后中国早期现代化改革背景谈起,突出张謇、孙中山与翁文灏这三个早期人物,再加上南京、上海、武汉等若干主要城市分析,把中国近代区域规划的思想演变勾画得很明确、清晰;对新中国成立后特别是改革开放后区域规划的新发展,以及对未来区域规划展望,也作了较为周到的分析与研究。总体看来,是书既有史料钩沉,又有评论与探索,纵横交织,一气呵成,是一部难得的学术理论著作。
区域规划既关系到国家发展,又关系到城市发展,这至为重要,武廷海同志根据19世纪末至今100多年来区域发展与建设的事实,探讨中国近现代区域规划,其中民国时期“黄金十年”的规划建设、抗战时期战争洗礼中大后方的区域发展与建设、共产党敌后抗日根据地的发展,以至新中国成立后东北的恢复、三线建设等内容,往往是一般人所忽略或不理解的,而他逐一梳理,将区域规划、发展与建设概括得如此生动明了,可以说既是中国近现代区域规划的学术理论史,又是一部区域发展史。我年事较长,书中所述事情几乎就是从边上轻轻走过,读之至为亲切,甚以为快。
另一方面是喜见新人的成长。武廷海同志生长在苏北盐城农村,在南京大学地理系取得硕士学位后来清华攻读博士,在博士生阶段曾协助我草拟国际建协《北京宪章》,毕业后留校参与教学和项目工作,1999年开设《区域规划》课程,2002年主持徐州战略规划,现已成为清华大学建筑与城市研究所的骨干力量之一。他好学善思,来清华若干年后,曾与我谈起,“对地理已有一些新的想法”,我多少能理解,当然未得其详。他初拟治中国城市史,发现张謇后即和我一样寄情于近代城市与规划研究,以至于这本书的完成。对这样一位有思想有见解,饶有潜力的青年学者,余寄予厚望。
武廷海同志索序于余,爰此为序。
吴良镛
二○○六年十月
序二
和廷海谈起区域规划是两年前的事。当时,他在波士顿做访问学者,说看到荦荦大观的欧美区域规划著述,打算写一个与之平行的中国区域规划。没想到,今天真的写出来了。
众所周知,由于历史的原因,在全球现代化进程中,中国社会发展逐步落到了西方的后面,学术界对区域规划的研究,往往也是对欧美发达国家论述较多,对中国不仅涉及较少,而且每每失之偏颇,因此对中国的发展成就特别是对改革开放以来的区域发展,也就难以给予恰当的解释。可喜的事,《中国近现代区域规划》一书以现代化的视角,详细展现“世界的中国”区域规划发展的来龙去脉,不仅为我们认识中国近现代区域规划提供了一个宏阔的背景,而且让我们更清楚地认识到中国在世界区域规划史上的独特价值,丰富、发展了世界区域规划理论。
当前,正值中国城市规划学会成立50周年大庆,学界呼吁总结历史经验,继往开来。《中国近现代区域规划》梳理了1949年以来现代中国区域规划的发展,展现了新中国规划事业发展的一个侧面;并且,该书将新中国区域规划发展置于鸦片战争以来160多年的历史脉络中,我们可以清楚地看到新中国区域规划发展的时代特征,同时也进一步加深了对近现代区域规划的认识。作者指出,中国近现代区域规划发展与国家命运息息相关,区域规划是空间治理的手段,在落实科学发展观、全面建设小康社会的今天,这一观念无疑具有积极的时代价值;基于历史的、比较的分析,作者还提出积极、务实地构建区域空间规划体系的设想,这对当今乃至未来中国区域规划发展也具有一定的启发意义,可供有关部门决策参考。
综观全书,作者较为完整地展现了堪与欧美比较的近现代中国区域规划,希望在不久的将来,能看到作者关于欧盟、美国区域规划的论述及其对中国的启示,甚至扩充到更有比较和启发意义的南美、非洲等发展中国家与地区,逐步地对世界区域规划发展有一个较为全面的展现,为中国区域规划发展提供更多更合适的借鉴。
是为序。
仇保兴
二○○六年九月
Preface
Regional planning is an important means of spatial governance and it maps out strategic choices to be made by national or local governments in response to environmental changes. During the period from the Opium War in 1840 to the founding of the socialist China in 1949, China was forced to shift the way of traditional dynastic changes to modernization under the impacts of western capitalist countries. As the result, regional planning in modern China has developed with remarkable unique characteristics in contrast to what was experienced in the ancient times and other countries.
Under the paradigm of “modernization”, I have tried to reexamine regional planning in modern China, its environment, forms, contents and evolution. I divide the history of regional planning in modern China into four stages, including (1) The birth of regional planning (1840—1926); (2) Regional planning in statebuilding period (1911—1949); (3) Regional planning during Maos era (1949—1978); and (4) New development of regional planning during the period of reform and opening (since 1979). I have shown that modern regional planning of China emerged from the practice of local moderation at the turn of the 19th and 20th century. During the first half of the 20th century, regional planning developed at national level along with the effort of statebuilding. Later in the 1950s, the rapid socialist planned economy growth made it possible for regional planning to become an independent subject of planning. Since the early1980s, regional planning has become a part of international planning culture, while China has experienced dramatic transitions towards a market economy and has become an integrated part of the global economy. Clearly, regional planning has experienced two different economy systems since the foundation of the Peoples Republic of China in 1949. I believe that Chinas experiences and lessons in regional planning are rich and valuable, and such experiences and lessons can make invaluable contribution to the development of regional planning in general.
In this book, I also have demonstrated that there is a strong orientation towards comprehensive spatial planning in modern China. At the end of the book, I offer some recommendations regarding how to further improve Chinas regional spatial planning. It is hoped that such a new style of regional planning will become an important tool for national macroeconomic regulation, help to build and improve regional competitiveness in the global economy, and provide strong support to build humanfriendly settlements. Specific reforms include (1) changing the compartmental practice of planning by different functional departments, (2) developing horizontal cooperation among different governmental agencies, (3) clarifying the main governmental body for drafting and implementing regional planning, and (4) strengthening vertical cooperation.
