城市規(guī)劃外文翻譯--決定性的補救辦法——城市規(guī)劃無效現(xiàn)象探源

1、<p><b>　　中文1737字</b></p><p>　　Fatal Remedies——The Sources of Ineffectiveness in Planning</p><p>　　That we learn by our mistakes is an axiom of the rational model of urban

2、and regional planning·Feedback procedures should , in theory ,result in the prompt amendment or abandonment of policies that prove to be ineffective .In the longer term ,at the national level ,widespread and rigorou

3、s appraisal should permit the codification of sources of planning failure and generate a more sensitive and informed understanding ,by professionals ,governments and the community at large ,of the possibilities o</p&g

4、t;<p>　　As far as individual plans ae concerned , the review process is usually moe casual than formal , if it occurs at all . Planning agencies tend to review and revise their work irregularly , in accordance wit

5、h political priorities, or in response to a cacophony of complaints by vested interests including other government instrumentalities . The latter occasions often represent a kind of planning epilogue which has the merit

6、of resolving politically contentious questions avoided earlier in plan prep</p><p>　　Performance evaluation ,then ,is a difficult task . To start with , it is not often easy to identify what is being evaluat

7、ed . Policy , strategy and individual measures may be covert , implied or specific and there is the problem of null policy . Moreover , if particular objectives are the subject of overlapping measures implemented by seve

8、ral agencies , it may be difficult to isllate the set of policies concerned with a given problem, . For that matter , even within a single planning document ,</p><p>　　Performance monitoring of planning syst

9、ems , or of planning as such , appears to have attracted more consistent attention ..Business , community groups , governments , bureaucracies and academics all have an abiding interest in criticising the procedures by w

10、hich plans are prepared and planning decisions are made , and in making suggestions for improvement . A modest , and reasonably practical approach to system evaluation is commonly adopted by governments . The emphasis is

11、 on collecting data a</p><p>　　At a deeper level , there are many serious thinkers who doubt whether planning systems can ever achieve what they are purportedly designed to achieve——not that this has discour

12、aged planners from plugging bravely on . It has been argued that‘urban policy is fundamentally too complicated to be successful’,Analysts have not been slow to identify factors which fundamentally preclude successful pla

13、nning in capitalist societies . Written in a so-called critical idiom , much of this literature starts f</p><p>　　Part of the problem with any assessment of planning systems is that urban and regional planni

14、ng is concerned with only one of the many sets of concerns which fall within the jurisdiction of sovereign governments . Other desiderata may include increasing the production of goods and services and national income ,

15、the maximisation of comparative advantage in international trade , ensuring a high level of social and economic adaptability or the protection of individual freedom of choice and responsi</p><p>　　In reality

16、 , narrower forms of analysis are likely to be the only practical option , and may well offer sharper insights than studier designed to grasp the complete picture . A variety of evaluative approaches , individually incom

17、plete as they may be , but originating in a range of disciplines and contributing in their own way to a greater understanding , is thus to be welcomed . Planners can learn much , for example , from the literature on such

18、 matters as conflict management ,bureaucratic and </p><p>　　決定性的補救辦法——城市規(guī)劃無效現(xiàn)象探源</p><p>　　從錯誤中學(xué)習(xí)是城市區(qū)域規(guī)劃的一條準(zhǔn)則。從理論上講，反饋過程應(yīng)該能促使人們對業(yè)已證明無效的政策立即進(jìn)行糾正或摒棄。從長遠(yuǎn)角度看，國家級的、廣泛而嚴(yán)格的評估之后理當(dāng)歸納整理規(guī)劃失敗的各種原因，使政府、專業(yè)人員，甚

19、至廣大居民都能更好地了解規(guī)劃活動的各種可能及政府的局限。無論是單個的規(guī)劃，還是整個規(guī)劃體系都需要這種監(jiān)控，在每種情況下，實踐都不可能與理論完全一致。</p><p>　　就單個規(guī)劃而言，復(fù)審過程即使有也都隨意性大，不那么正規(guī)化。規(guī)劃機構(gòu)的復(fù)審和修正工作也不正規(guī)，而是按照政治上的優(yōu)先考慮來進(jìn)行，或?qū)鹊美婕瘓F(tuán)（包括其他政府機構(gòu)）的大聲抱怨作出反應(yīng)。后一種情況往往代表規(guī)劃活動的結(jié)局，其優(yōu)點為：可以接君早先在規(guī)劃準(zhǔn)備

20、金段避而不談而在政治上有正義的問題。多數(shù)規(guī)劃組織都沒有財力和時間，也不愿意對規(guī)劃績效進(jìn)行系統(tǒng)的、連續(xù)的評估。不論是處于有意還是疏忽，總之，規(guī)劃活動成了典型的“雜亂無章”的增量過程。有第三方做成的評估，通常包含對政策的有效性作專業(yè)分析，有時范圍更加廣泛、更加仔細(xì)周到、更加公正。遺憾的是，地方規(guī)劃很少能得到詳細(xì)的、獨立的評估。即使在對規(guī)劃政策進(jìn)行相當(dāng)嚴(yán)格的分析的地方，正如摩爾和羅德1977年對英國區(qū)域規(guī)劃政策的評估中，整成難以界定，相互矛盾

21、，有不斷地變化翻新，加之經(jīng)濟(jì)體制的開放性，程問題的指標(biāo)，冒昧的假設(shè)，以及令人懷疑的統(tǒng)計方法，所有這一切加在一起使得評估結(jié)果難以令人信服。</p><p>　　由此可見，規(guī)劃績效評估并非易事。首先，弄清評估項目就不容易。政策、策略及某些具體的規(guī)劃發(fā)放或隱蔽或間接，或特別，各不相同，還存在無效政策的難題。而且，當(dāng)某些特定的目標(biāo)成為數(shù)家機構(gòu)爭相采納的測評方法的對象時，要把相關(guān)的一套政策與特定問題區(qū)分開來也不容易。正因為

22、如此，即使在一個具體的規(guī)劃文件中，同一個目的也可能涉及幾個政策。其次，必要的資料也難以得到，最好的時候也可能用不能令人滿意的代用指標(biāo)。最后，因果關(guān)系的衡量還會在開放的復(fù)雜的社會中造成無法克服的困難，在各種政策相互強化或相互對立的地方，或在反應(yīng)明顯滯后的地方，情況尤其如此。</p><p>　　規(guī)劃體系或規(guī)劃本身的績效監(jiān)控視乎引起了更多的注意。商業(yè)部門、社團(tuán)組織、政府部門、官僚部門，以及學(xué)術(shù)界都不厭其煩地對規(guī)劃的準(zhǔn)

23、備過程及決策程序提出批評，并熱衷于提出改進(jìn)意見。政府通常采用謹(jǐn)慎使用的系統(tǒng)評估方法，強調(diào)收集有關(guān)資料，比如審批規(guī)劃申請所需的時間等，其目的是改進(jìn)現(xiàn)有規(guī)劃體制，偶爾也有更激進(jìn)的大修大補。</p><p>　　在更深層次上，許多勤于認(rèn)真思考的人懷疑規(guī)劃體系是否能達(dá)到其特定目標(biāo)——雖然這并沒有妨礙規(guī)劃人員奮力工作，而是因為城市政策本來就太復(fù)雜，很難獲得成功。分析家們很快找到了資本注意國家妨礙規(guī)劃成功的原因。這方面的文獻(xiàn)

24、大多使用了所謂的批評的東西來幫助改進(jìn)自由民主混合經(jīng)濟(jì)體制中的規(guī)劃體系。大衛(wèi)·哈維認(rèn)為“規(guī)劃人云視乎注定要永遠(yuǎn)遭受挫折”；麥克·迪爾和艾倫·斯科特則認(rèn)為策劃功能是規(guī)劃的反應(yīng)性和姑息性本質(zhì)并不僅僅是技術(shù)、分析或認(rèn)為失誤的結(jié)果，而是一宗社會邏輯的必然產(chǎn)物。這種邏輯給一切政治行為的規(guī)范和有效性設(shè)置障礙。</p><p>　　平桂規(guī)劃體系的部分問題表現(xiàn)為：都市和區(qū)域規(guī)劃只涉及政府權(quán)限范圍要關(guān)心

25、的諸多問題之一。其他需要關(guān)心的問題包括增加商品生產(chǎn)、服務(wù)項目、國民收入以及在國際貿(mào)易中最大限度地增加相對優(yōu)勢，從而確保社會和經(jīng)濟(jì)的高度適應(yīng)能力，保護(hù)個人選著自由和責(zé)任感。這些目標(biāo)可能會相互沖突，但必須在和經(jīng)濟(jì)的高度適應(yīng)能力，保護(hù)個人選擇自由和責(zé)任感。這些目標(biāo)可能會相互沖突，但必須在其中途范圍內(nèi)尋求妥協(xié)。任何不面對這些沖突的評估只能反映部分問題，對體系改進(jìn)工作不會有多大知道作用。而且，對一個規(guī)劃體系完全合理的評估只能反映部分問題，對體系改

26、進(jìn)工作不會有多大指導(dǎo)作用。而且，對一個規(guī)劃體系完全合理的蘋果還應(yīng)考慮到被規(guī)劃社區(qū)店行為、分析和信息的諸多局限性以及規(guī)劃人員和決策官員的局限性。</p><p>　　實際上，狹義分析法可能是唯一實際的選擇。與全面分析方法相比，他恩那個提供更加敏銳的觀察力。因此，受歡迎的可能是各類這種評估方法：單獨看他們可能都不完善，但由于源自各種學(xué)科領(lǐng)域，因此，可以各自的方式幫助人們對問題有更加深入的理解。比如：規(guī)劃者可以從有沖突