权益分类	功能权益	普通用户	{{item.name}}会员
{{category.name}}	{{benefitItem.name}}

Essential infrastructure or ornamental afterthought? Reimagining urban green space planning in the contemporary city

必要的基础设施还是装饰性的事后考虑？

基本信息

批准号：
ES/T009063/1
负责人：
Meredith Whitten
金额：
$ 12.8万
依托单位：
London School of Economics and Political Science
依托单位国家：
英国
项目类别：
Fellowship
财政年份：
2019
资助国家：
英国
起止时间：
2019 至无数据
项目状态：
已结题

来源：
https://gtr.ukri.org/projects?ref=ES%2FT009063%2F1
关键词：
Essential infrastructure ornamental afterthought Reimagining

项目摘要

My research addresses the contested role of urban green space. I examine the paradox of establishing planning goals and policies that emphasise urban green spaces as critical to contemporary and future urban life, yet managing them as an optional amenity with inconsistent and vulnerable funding. As such, I identify a gap between the theoretical way urban green space is discussed and the practical way it is delivered.Urban green space has risen up policy and research agendas, buoyed by a heightened awareness of the role nature plays in addressing contemporary urban challenges, such as climate change, chronic health conditions and waning biodiversity. A focus on green infrastructure has further elevated the role of urban green space, connecting it with critical urban systems and services, such as urban cooling and flood prevention. Yet, as urbanisation continues at a rapid pace, urban green spaces have not realised their economic, environmental and social potential. My research finds that, instead of being managed as "critical scaffolding" (Eisenman, 2013: 298) or essential elements of a multifunctional, interconnected system of green infrastructure, green spaces are conceptualised as an ornamental afterthought, detached from the city around them.I demonstrate how a powerful cultural and institutional preoccupation with heritage - grounded in a Victorian-era perspective of nature - leads to an "institutional straightjacket" (Lowndes, 2001: 1955), resulting in missed opportunities to use green space as a planning tool to provide the strategic connectivity and multifunctional infrastructure identified as essential for urban sustainability.Drawing from the frameworks of new institutionalism and green infrastructure, my research challenges existing norms around how the concept of green space is constructed. Rarely applied to urban sustainability issues, new institutionalism offers a link with history that helps explain limitations of contemporary green space planning. Building on this, my research demonstrates a path dependency of the conceptualisation of urban green space and lays out how a Victorian obsession with "idealised countryside" (Welch, 1991: 6) dominates green space delivery and management today. My research also contributes to the emerging framework of green infrastructure, showing how, despite falling under the broad umbrella of "green," urban green spaces are not conceptualised as green infrastructure due to constraints from heritage-based policies, planning processes and institutions.Using empirical evidence collected in Inner London, this work demonstrates the paralysing impact an institutionalised conceptualisation of urban green space has on planning, governance and funding processes. This overrides contemporary policies, grounded in sustainable development and green infrastructure, to mitigate harmful impacts of urbanisation. Further, I expand on green space governance. Two newly established organisations - the London Green Spaces Commission and London National Park City Foundation - address urban greening beyond the local scale. This work examines whether these organisations represent a shift towards a more integrated, strategic approach to providing green space as a system of interconnected, multifunctional green infrastructure. With implications for planning, governance and sustainability debates, my research argues that, to truly realise the broad-ranging benefits urban green spaces can provide, green space must be conceived as critical infrastructure on par with roads and utilities. This differs from traditional conversations about green space as a heritage asset and amenity. This shift is made more urgent by a heightened awareness of climate change and its threat to London's economic, environmental and social vitality. With 33 percent of London considered vegetated public green space, it is hard to ignore the contribution this asset could make to urban life if green space is reconceptualised.

我的研究解决了城市绿地的争议性角色。我研究了这样一种悖论：制定规划目标和政策，强调城市绿地对当代和未来的城市生活至关重要，但却将它们作为一种可选的便利设施来管理，资金不一致且脆弱。因此，我发现了理论上讨论城市绿地的方式与提供城市绿地的实际方式之间的差距。城市绿地已经上升到政策和研究议程上，这得益于人们对自然在应对当代城市挑战中所起作用的高度认识，如气候变化、慢性健康状况和生物多样性的减弱。对绿色基础设施的关注进一步提升了城市绿地的作用，将其与城市降温和防洪等关键城市系统和服务连接起来。然而，随着城市化进程的加快，城市绿地还没有实现其经济、环境和社会潜力。我的研究发现，绿地并不是作为“关键的脚手架”(Eisenman，2013：298)或多功能、相互关联的绿色基础设施系统的基本要素来管理的，而是被概念化为一种装饰性的事后思考，与周围的城市分离。我展示了一种强大的文化和制度对遗产的关注--植根于维多利亚时代的自然视角--导致了错失了将绿色空间作为规划工具来提供战略性连接和多功能基础设施的机会(Lowndes，2001：1955)。从新制度主义和绿色基础设施的框架中汲取教训，我的研究挑战了围绕如何构建绿色空间概念的现有规范。新制度主义很少应用于城市可持续发展问题，它提供了一种与历史的联系，有助于解释当代绿地规划的局限性。在此基础上，我的研究展示了城市绿地概念化的路径依赖，并展示了维多利亚时代对“理想化的乡村”(Welch，1991：6)的痴迷如何主导着今天的绿地交付和管理。我的研究也对新兴的绿色基础设施框架做出了贡献，展示了尽管城市绿地被归入广泛的“绿色”保护伞之下，但由于基于传统的政策、规划过程和制度的限制，城市绿地如何没有被概念化为绿色基础设施。这项工作使用在伦敦内城收集的经验证据，展示了城市绿地制度化概念化对规划、治理和资金过程的瘫痪影响。这凌驾于以可持续发展和绿色基础设施为基础的当代政策之上，以减轻城市化的有害影响。此外，我还阐述了绿色空间治理。两个新成立的组织--伦敦绿地委员会和伦敦国家公园城市基金会--致力于超越当地规模的城市绿化。这项工作考察了这些组织是否代表着向更一体化、更具战略性的方法转变，将绿色空间作为一个相互关联的多功能绿色基础设施系统来提供。我的研究对规划、治理和可持续发展辩论产生了影响，我的研究认为，要真正实现城市绿地可以提供的广泛好处，必须将绿地视为与道路和公用事业同等的关键基础设施。这与将绿色空间作为遗产资产和便利设施的传统对话不同。随着人们对气候变化及其对伦敦经济、环境和社会活力的威胁的认识不断提高，这一转变变得更加紧迫。由于伦敦33%的地区被认为是植被繁茂的公共绿地，如果绿地被重新定义，人们很难忽视这项资产可能对城市生活做出的贡献。