【作者】 陈睿；

【导师】 吕斌；

【作者基本信息】 北京大学 ， 人文地理学， 2007， 博士

【摘要】 本文对都市圈的空间结构决定其经济绩效的机制和规律进行了研究,分别从无形的制度结构和有形的空间结构等两个层次建立了都市圈空间结构与经济绩效之间的复杂映射关系,依据于此并以济南都市圈为例,讨论了绩效优化目的下我国都市圈空间结构的调控模式与对策。本文的主要论点如下:(1)空间结构与经济绩效之间存在十分重要的关联,空间结构本身就是基本上决定空间经济绩效的那些各个侧面的社会特征,经济绩效的高低又激励着微观空间行为和宏观空间结构的重构,二者之间是一对循环因果、互为反馈的动态闭环。(2)空间结构存在六个维度,并对经济绩效具有不同的影响机制。地理环境通过为经济社会活动提供场所或本底而影响经济绩效,规模密度通过为经济社会活动提供集聚基础而影响经济绩效,形态结构通过为经济社会活动提供外部边界和内部可达网络而影响经济绩效,社会经济结构通过为经济社会活动提供经济社会资本和网络基础而影响经济绩效,创新结构通过为经济社会活动提供知识溢出而影响经济绩效,空间制度结构通过为经济社会活动提供合理的权利边界而影响经济绩效。(3)在我国特殊的社会经济背景下,我国都市圈在地理意义上相当于一级城市经济区,但具有明显的制度性地域特征,即承载并实施相关制度结构的地域单元,是对区域内涉及的所有地方政府、非政府组织和相关企业个人产生普遍约束和激励的空间安排,是为弥补市场和政府在供给区域性公共物品中失灵的一种制度创新。(4)都市圈空间制度结构是决定其经济绩效高低的结构基础。其能够提高经济绩效的机制在于,并不改变政府的分权结构以及政府与市场的关系,而是通过都市圈管治、都市圈规划、完善政府事权安排和稀缺资源管制等一系列制度创新,同时降低区域性事务中的信息成本、协调成本和策略成本,从而有效激励区域内各主体协调行动和分工合作,达到增进区域经济绩效的目的。(5)我国都市圈经济绩效的提高可遵循两条不同的路径,路径的初始空间状态分别是单极集中或者多元分散,随着总量绩效的增加,虽然中间可能会经历集聚或扩散等多个空间结构发展阶段,但却殊途同归,最终都市圈的基尼系数是在上下变动中趋于收敛的,均达到各自相对合适的均衡水平,形成相对均衡亦是相对集中的空间经济格局。(6)都市圈空间结构决定经济绩效的机制也在于能够激励区域分工合作行为,但仅依据于此所设想的线性映射关系则相对简单化了,实际的关系存在一个权衡:都市圈城市化和创新部门集聚对总量绩效具有显著影响,但对结构性绩效的影响不明确,存在反向作用于结构性绩效的可能;核心城市规模、城市网络均衡度和政府集权分权构成权衡的另一面,其对结构性绩效具有显著影响,但对总量绩效的影响不明确,存在反向作用于总量绩效的可能;中心城市分工、圈层分工整合和外圈分区自立等社会经济结构对总量绩效和结构性绩效具有显著且同向的影响,在经济绩效权衡中起到平衡作用,是促进综合经济绩效提高的关键砝码。(7)完善制度安排、积极推进城市化、构建更为均衡的交通网络和促进科研创新部门在核心城市集聚是我国所有都市圈在绩效优化目的下均可采取的空间结构调控策略。对处在由非均衡走向相对均衡演化路径上的都市圈的长期规划,以及已经发展较为成熟、处于溢出发展阶段的都市圈的近期规划,还可通过控制中心城市规模并引导中小城市集聚、分散中心城市的服务业功能并培育服务职能分工体系、分散中心城市的制造业功能并促进内外圈层产业整合和垂直分工、引导外圈多个自立性子区域产业功能的分别集聚发展、培育更为均衡的城市网络和采取更加集权的行政区划结构等来提高经济绩效;反之亦反。济南都市圈无论在演化路径还是发展阶段上均趋向相对均衡;根据上述模式,相应地提出了空间结构优化对策。更多还原

【Abstract】 Taking the immaterial institutional spatial structure and the material physical spatial structure as two levels, the author studies the mechanisms and laws of how spatial structure determines the economic performance in metropolitan regions and establishes a complex map between these two elements. Basing on these conclusions and taking Jinan metropolitan region as example, regulation models and optimizing measures are finally discussed. Main arguments includes as below:There have important relations between spatial structure and economic performance. In another word, spatial structure itself is those social characteristics of different perspectives that determine the spatial economic performance. The economic performance in the other hand will inspirit micro spatial behavior and result in reconstruction of macro spatial structure. So these two social sides are a cycle of cause and effect, also a dynamic closed-loop feedback to each other.Spatial structure has six dimensions, which have different mechanisms influence on economic performance. The geography environment provides the site or background for economic & social activities, and then affects economic performance. Also, the scale & density structure will provide the basis of agglomeration for economic & social activities. The spatial form will provide outside border and inner accessibility network for economic and social activities. The social and economic structure can supply the origin of economic or social capital and network. The innovation structure can produce knowledge spillover. And the spatial institutional structure will provide reasonable right boundaries for daily economic & social activities. All these structures will then affects economic performance.In particular social and economic background in China, although the metropolitan region is one level of urban economic area in geographical sense, more essentially it is an institutional area, that is a geographical unit supports and implements some related institutional frames. Metropolitan region is a spatial arrangement that can have common restriction and motivation on all the local governments, NGOs, companies and individuals. It’s an institutional innovation for the failure of supply regional public goods by the market or separate governments.Spatial institutional structure of metropolitan region is more a basic element in determining the whole economic performance than that of the material spatial structures. The mechanism of improving economic performance by institutional structure is that, it could reduce all the costs of information, coordination, and maneuver at one time, and encourage regional coordination, labor division and cooperation effectively. All these need not to change the decentralized structure of the governments and the relationship between the government and the market, but through a series of institutional innovation include metropolitan regional governance, metropolitan regional planning, clarifying rights in government affairs, and scarce resource control, etc., to achieve the purpose of enhancing regional economic performance.To improve the economic performance of metropolitan regions in China could follow two paths. The initial statuses of these two paths are respectively single core centralization and multi-core decentralization. As the gross performance increase, the region would possibly experience several development phases, perhaps agglomeration or pervasion, but the different paths would reach a same way. The GINI coefficient is likely to converge to an appropriate balance after alteration up and down, and form a comparatively even also concentrated spatial economic structure in the end. The mechanism of material spatial structure of metropolitan region determining the economic performance also consists in being able to enhance regional coordination and cooperation. But rely on this only would get an oversimplified linear mapping connection between spatial structure and economic performance. A more actual relationship depends on a trade-off: regional urbanization and the agglomeration of innovative sectors have significant impact on gross performance, but are ambiguous for structural performance, and have the possibility of performance reduction. Scale of the core city, balanced degree of city network and government centralization or decentralization lie the other side of the trade-off. Distinctively, they have significant effect on structural in stead of gross performance, and also have the possibility to reduce whole performance. Services division among central cities, industries division and integration between inner and outer rings, industries autocephaly among sub-areas in the outer ring are three key weights to improve comprehensive performance. These social structure elements have both significant and same direction impact on gross and structural performance, and play a balancing role in economic performance trade-off.Improving institutional arrangements of metropolitan regions, actively promoting urbanization, constructing a more balanced transportation network, and leading the R&D sectors to agglomerate in the core city are the common structure regulating strategies for metropolitan regions in China at the purpose of optimizing performance. For the long-term planning of those metropolitan regions on the evolution path from non-equilibrium to equilibrium, and the near-future planning of those mature metropolitan regions in the development phase of spillover, controlling growth of the core city and promoting agglomeration of small and medium-scale cities, dispersing service functions in the core city and fostering a service division system, decentralizing manufacturing industrial functions and increasing integration and vertical division between inner and outer rings, guiding the outer ring separated into several functional self-sustaining sub-areas and promoting industries to agglomerate and integrate independently, constructing a more balanced network of cities, and taking a more centralized structure of the administrative division etc. are also effective methods to improve economic performance. The plan methods for the metropolitan regions in the opposite path or development phase would also be opposite. Jinan Metropolitan Region has the trend that towards more even no matter from the evolution path or the development phase. According to the foregoing conclusions, corresponding spatial structure optimizing countermeasures are discussed.更多还原