Simulations for Innovative Mechanisms for the Self-organizing City: Testing new tools for value capturing

在整个西欧，城市复兴的活动现在已经有40年左右的历史了。从目前的Vantage来看，这段历史最好被理解为一个实验和再实验的一系列政策工具，机构和空间尺度。以规模问题为例，20世纪70年代英国政策制定者对“本地”的偏好在20世纪80年代和90年代初被地区所取代（在20世纪50年代更早流行）。这种“新区域主义”之后，在20世纪90年代末/21世纪初，政策转向了“城市”，被解释为大都市地区-本身令人联想到20世纪30年代的分析和政策。最近，这已经让位于2010年后的（新的）“新地方主义”（历史回顾见，Lord和Tewdwr-Jones，2013）。针对这种快速循环的偏好，城市政策应该以何种规模实施，我们可以产生一个平行的历史，由中央政府创建的有限寿命机构的范围，以提供这种政策（1980年代的城市发展公司，1990年代后期的区域发展机构，2000年代中期的城市再生公司是一个极少数的指示性例子）。总体印象是一个主要以动荡为特征的政策景观。事实上，不同时期之间唯一的共同点是国家政府作为机构本身及其所适用的地理区域的设计师所发挥的核心作用。2011年《地方主义和权力下放法》真正背离了这一模式。根据这项立法，公民个人在西方世界任何地方都首次有权组成联盟，决定自己社区的边界，并为该地区制定计划。由此产生的邻里规划可以涵盖许多历史上一直由市政厅专业规划师保留的特征，包括例如新发展的设计特点。不仅如此，邻里规划进程还可以借鉴创新的筹资模式，其中一些模式不属于传统的公共或公私财务安排，而这些安排在过去一直是常态。这方面的好例子包括社区土地信托基金和社区建设权倡议，这两项倡议允许私人共同购买被认为对当地具有重要意义的现有建筑物或开发新的建筑物。这项研究的目的是双重的。首先，它试图调查这个过程中的自我组织的治理城市政策的解释框架提供的博弈论;其次，它的目的是上下文的调查结果从英格兰在更广泛的背景下提供的相关方法，已在欧洲大陆率先。以邻里规划论坛作为实证研究的国内组成部分的主题，我们将使用一系列的研究方法植根于博弈论和实验经济学，探索城市规划政策的设计和交付，在这种自组织的方式。要解决的基本问题将包括什么条件是必要的联盟自发形成;什么功能，促进联盟的稳定/不稳定，以及;如何使用集体化的金融工具（如社区土地信托）鼓励社区为导向的城市转型。邻里规划论坛的研究结果，然后将添加到类似的自我组织的方法，以影响西北欧的合作伙伴大学报告的城市转型的经验。研究的这一国际性特点旨在鼓励政策转让和提高工作对决策者的价值。

Across Western Europe the activity of urban regeneration is now around 40 years old. From the vantage point of the present this history is best understood as one of experimentation and re-experimentation with a range of policy tools, agencies and spatial scales. To take the issue of scale as an example, the preferences of British policy makers in the 1970s for 'the local' were replaced by regions in the 1980s and early 1990s (having been earlier in vogue in the 1950s). This 'new regionalism' was followed by policy orientated towards 'cities', construed as metropolitan city-regions, in the later 1990s/early 2000s - itself redolent of analysis and policy stretching back to the 1930s. Most recently this has given way to a (new) 'new localism' post-2010 (for a historical review see, Lord and Tewdwr-Jones, 2013). Against this rapid cycling of preferences for the scale at which urban policy should be delivered we could produce a parallel history of the range of limited-life agencies created by the central state to deliver such policy (the Urban Development Corporations of the 1980s, the Regional Development Agencies of the late 1990s, the Urban Regeneration Companies of the mid-2000s being a very few indicative examples).The overarching impression is a policy landscape characterised primarily by upheaval. Indeed the only commonality between periods is the central role played by national government as architect of the agencies themselves and the geographies to which they apply. A genuine departure to this formula came with the Localism and Decentralism Act, 2011. Under this piece of legislation for the first time anywhere in the Western world individual citizens have been given the power to assemble into coalitions, determine the boundaries of their own neighbourhood and author a plan for that area. The resultant neighbourhood plan can cover many of the features that would historically have been the preserve of a professional planner at City Hall including, for example, the design characteristics of new development. More than this, the neighbourhood planning process can draw upon innovative funding models, some of which lie outside the traditional public or public-private financial arrangements that have been the norm in the past. Good examples in this respect include Community Land Trusts and the Community Right to Build initiative which allow private individuals to jointly acquire existing buildings identified as being of local significance or develop new ones. The purpose of this research is twofold. Firstly it seeks to investigate this process of self-organised governance of urban policy using the explanatory framework provided by game theory; secondly it aims to contextualise findings from England within the wider setting offered by related approaches that have been pioneered in mainland Europe. Taking neighbourhood planning fora as the empirical subject for the domestic component of the research we will use a range of research methods rooted in game theory and experimental economics to explore urban planning policy designed and delivered in this self-organised manner. Fundamental questions to be addressed will include what conditions are necessary for coalitions to spontaneously form; what features promote coalition stability/instability, and; how might the use of collectivised financial instruments (such as a community land trust) encourage community-directed urban transformation. The results of this research on neighbourhood planning fora will then be added to the experience of similarly self-organised approaches to effecting urban transformation reported by partner universities in North West Europe. This international feature of the research is designed to encourage policy transfer and enhance the value of the work to policy makers.