华东师范大学学报(哲学社会科学版) ›› 2026, Vol. 58 ›› Issue (5): 169-182.doi: 10.16382/j.cnki.1000-5579.2026.05.016

• 中国式现代化:城市内涵式发展研究 • 上一篇    

国际比较视角下城市内涵式发展的治理机制及其启示

张传勇, 李哲, 王光滨   

  • 出版日期:2026-09-15 发布日期:2026-10-09
  • 作者简介:张传勇,上海交通大学国际与公共事务学院、中国城市治理研究院研究员(上海,200030)
    李哲、王光滨(通讯作者),上海交通大学国际与公共事务学院博士研究生
  • 基金资助:
    国家自然科学基金面上项目“空间一般均衡下房地产市场供求关系变化影响居民城市间居住决策的机制、效应与对策研究”(项目编号:72674188);“家庭决策视角下城市基础教育资源配置对住房市场的影响研究:机制、效应与福利分析”(项目编号:72174119)。

Governance Mechanisms of Intensive Urban Development from an International Comparative Perspective and Their Policy Implications

Chuanyong Zhang, Zhe Li, Guangbin Wang   

  • Online:2026-09-15 Published:2026-10-09

摘要:

推动城市内涵式发展,是破解城市外延式扩张和存量治理效能不足困境的关键。本文通过梳理国际典型案例,基于“目标—制度—实践”分析框架开展跨国比较,揭示城市内涵式发展的治理逻辑;在此基础上,归纳出五类典型治理机制:德国以法律管控与生态补偿为核心的底线约束型,北欧以公众参与与福利保障为核心的包容共享型,日本以“立地适正化”与柔性诱导为核心的引导调适型,美国以财税激励与产权创新为核心的市场激励型,以及新加坡以两级规划与国有土地为核心的行政统合型。本文发现,存量治理的关键在于制度工具与情境要素的有效匹配。推动中国特色城市内涵式发展,应在目标上转向包容性紧凑发展,在制度上构建刚性底线与弹性激励相结合的政策组合,在实践上实施差异化调适与秩序化收缩,在结构上重构多元协商机制,进而实现空间效率与社会正义的统一。

关键词: 城市内涵式发展, 存量空间治理, 治理机制, “目标—制度—实践”分析框架

Abstract:

Promoting intensive urban development is key to addressing the problems of extensive urban expansion and inadequate governance of existing urban areas. By reviewing representative international cases and undertaking a cross-national comparison grounded in an analytical framework of “goals-institutions-practices, ” this article unpacks the governance logic of intensive urban development. It then identifies five representative governance mechanisms: Germany’s baseline-constraint model, centered on legal controls and ecological compensation; the Nordic inclusive-sharing model, centered on public participation and welfare provision; Japan’s guidance-and-adjustment model, centered on location optimization and flexible inducements; the United States’ market-incentive model, centered on fiscal and tax incentives and property-rights innovation; and Singapore’s administrative-integration model, centered on two-tier planning and state ownership of land. The analysis finds that effective alignment between institutional instruments and contextual factors constitutes the key to governing existing urban areas. To advance intensive urban development with Chinese characteristics, strategic goals should shift toward inclusive and compact development; institutions should combine firm baseline constraints with flexible incentives; practices should incorporate differentiated adjustment and orderly shrinkage; and governance structures should rebuild mechanisms for pluralistic consultation. Taken together, these measures can reconcile spatial efficiency with social justice.

Key words: intensive urban development, governance of existing urban areas, governance mechanisms, analytical framework of “goals-institutions-practices”