Urban Studies 每年投稿量为1000多篇，每年发表16期，共180篇论文左右。由于稿件量大，文章从接收到正式出版周期较长，因此编辑部会在稿件接收排版后的第一时间在网上发布论文全文 (Online First) 。“论文快递”栏目将同步推出网上刊登的最新论文，方便读者了解Urban Studies的最新动态，敬请关注！
本期为“论文快递”栏目的第二百五十二期，将介绍Urban Studies近期正式发表期刊中的五篇论文。主题包括街道层面的城市设计治理，城市致密化、保护主义规划与社会公平，土地利用模式对交通税公投的影响，以及新地铁线路带来的住房价格和租金溢价。欢迎阅读。
Conceptualising ‘street-level’ urban design governance in Scotland
对苏格兰“街道层面”城市设计治理的概念化思考
Robert Richardson（英国格拉斯哥大学）This article develops ‘street-level bureaucracy’ theory to conceptualise how policy implementation within urban design governance is shared among actors whose role transcends sectoral responsibilities and motivations. It presents case study research with a Scottish local authority which has made a strategic investment in a placemaking policy agenda, including the creation of an influential design review panel of volunteer experts which exemplifies the wider embrace of private capacity within public governance. The paper identifies the distinctive role of design review panel members in street-level implementation, and shows how their discretion is shaped simultaneously by public and private interests. It concludes that understanding and utilising these micro-level processes provides opportunities for conceptualising policy implementation within a neoliberalising urban governance context, and for addressing the implementation gap between the aims of public urban design policy and the realities of delivery.
本文对“街道级官僚机构”理论进行了进一步的研究，以概念化城市设计治理中的政策实施如何在角色超越部门责任和动机的参与者之间共享。本文介绍了针对一个苏格兰地方政府进行的案例研究，该地方政府对一个场所营造政策议程进行了战略投资，包括创建了一个有影响力的、由志愿者专家组成的设计审查小组，该小组的创建表明在公共治理中对私人能力更广泛的接纳。本文指出了设计审查小组成员在街道层面的项目实施中的独特作用，并展示了他们的自由裁量权如何同时受到公共和私人利益的影响。本文得出的结论是，理解并利用这些微观层面的流程为在新自由主义城市治理背景下概念化“政策实施”这一命题提供了机会，并有助于解决公共城市设计政策目标与交付现实之间的实施差距。
design governance, implementation, planning, street-level bureaucracy, urban design
https://doi.org/10.1177/00420980231204219For whom do we densify? Explaining income variation across densification projects in the region of Utrecht, the Netherlands
为谁致密化？荷兰乌得勒支地区致密化项目间收入差异的解释
Vera Götze（瑞士伯尔尼大学地理研究所和区域经济发展中心）
Josje Anna Bouwmeester（瑞士伯尔尼大学地理研究所和区域经济发展中心）Mathias Jehling（德国莱布尼茨生态城市与区域发展研究所）While governments worldwide rely upon compact city policies to reduce land consumption from urban growth, recent studies have addressed the potential trade-off between densification and housing affordability. Concerns have been voiced that densification leads to a one-sided housing supply, structurally excluding low-income households. However, few studies address household income variation across densification projects, leaving us with a limited understanding of the circumstances under which exclusion occurs. To this end, we explore household incomes in densification projects between 2012 and 2020 in the Province of Utrecht, the Netherlands, where urban development is traditionally strongly regulated through active land policy. At the same time, current shifts towards a more deregulated housing market make for an interesting case. Exceptional access to detailed cadastral and census data allows us to identify densification projects and assign them a median household income each. We investigate the influence of location and transformation process on household incomes through regression analysis and conduct qualitative case studies of projects whose median income was highly mispredicted by the regression model. This allows us to integrate non-quantified factors, such as land ownership and public policy interventions, in explaining such interesting cases. For the Province of Utrecht, our study confirms that while households in densification projects earn significantly more than their neighbours, the range of incomes in densification projects is large. Project characteristics such as centrality, neighbourhood status and transformation process explain only a small share of this variance. For cases where median incomes are much lower than predicted by the model, public land ownership, in combination with inclusionary zoning, is essential in ensuring housing affordability. Our approach highlights the necessity of supplementing densification policies with measures that secure affordable housing.虽然世界各国政府都依靠紧凑的城市政策来减少城市增长带来的土地消耗，但最近的研究已经论证了致密化和住房可负担性之间存在潜在的利弊权衡。有人担心，致密化会导致住房供应失衡，从结构上将低收入家庭排除在外。然而，很少有研究涉及致密化项目中家庭收入的变化，所以我们对这种排除发生的情况了解有限。为此，我们研究了荷兰乌得勒支省2012年至2020年致密化项目中的家庭收入，而该省的城市发展历来通过积极的土地政策进行严格监管。与此同时，当前房地产市场监管更加放松的转变也使得其成为一个有趣的案例。我们特别访问了详细的地籍数据和人口普查数据，这使我们得以找到致密化项目，并为每个项目分配了一个家庭收入中位数。我们通过回归分析，研究地点和转变过程对家庭收入的影响，并针对一些中位收入被回归模型严重错误预测的项目，对其进行定性案例研究。这使我们能够整合非量化因素，例如土地所有权和公共政策干预，来解释这些有趣的案例。对于乌得勒支省，我们的研究证实，虽然致密化项目家庭的收入明显高于其邻里，但致密化项目家庭之间收入跨度很大。中心性、街区地位和转变过程等项目特征只能部分解释这种差异。针对收入中位数远低于模型预测结果的情况，我们发现，公共土地所有权与包容性分区相结合，对于确保住房可负担性至关重要。我们的方法强调了有必要在致密化政策中，结合保障经济适用住房的措施。
housing affordability, land use policies, spatial justice, the Netherlands, urban densification
住房可负担性、土地使用政策、空间正义、荷兰、城市致密化https://doi.org/10.1177/00420980231205793How land use patterns keep driving cheap: Geographic support for transportation taxes
土地利用模式如何使驾驶保持廉价？城市地理形态对交通税的支持效应
Adam Millard-Ball（美国加州大学洛杉矶分校）Purva Kapshikar（美国加州大学洛杉矶分校）Economists tend to favour price-based approaches, such as gasoline and carbon taxes, to address the negative impacts of car travel, while urban planners tend to emphasise land use planning such as compact development. In this paper, we argue that the two approaches are synergistic. We use precinct-level data from two California referenda to show that land use planning makes pricing more feasible: voters in dense, transit-oriented neighbourhoods are more willing to support a carbon price and increased gasoline taxes. Political ideology is a more important determinant of voting patterns, but in a closely divided election, land use patterns, public transportation, and other aspects of the built environment can determine the success of a referendum on driving taxes. Our results also imply that the voluminous research on land use and transportation underestimates the long-run impacts of compact development on driving, through ignoring the ways in which urban form shapes the politics of taxation.经济学家往往支持基于价格的方法，例如征收汽油税和碳税，以解决汽车出行的负面影响，而城市规划者则往往强调土地利用规划，例如紧凑型开发。本文认为这两种方法是协同作用的。我们利用美国加利福尼亚州两次公投的选区级数据来说明，土地利用规划使定价变得更加可行：人口密集、公共交通导向式街区的选民更愿意支持碳价和增加汽油税。政治意识形态是投票结果分布更重要的决定因素，但在势均力敌的选举中，土地利用模式、公共交通和建成环境的其他方面可以决定驾驶税公投的成功与否。我们的研究结果还表明，有关土地利用和交通的大量研究忽视了城市形态塑造税收政治的方式，从而低估了紧凑型发展对驾驶的长期影响。
built environment, environment/sustainability, land use, driving taxes, transport建成环境、环境/可持续性、土地利用、驾驶税、交通
https://doi.org/10.1177/00420980231207487New metro and housing price and rent premiums: A natural experiment in China
新地铁线路、住房价格与租金溢价：来自中国的自然实验
Dongsheng He（香港大学）
Guibo Sun（香港大学）
Ling Li（北京大学深圳研究生院）
Chris Webster（香港大学）
首次出版时间：2023/12/07｜研究论文
Abstract
Causal evidence of housing premiums of new metro lines is indispensable for financing and governing infrastructure investments. Previous studies have investigated the housing effects of urban rail transit with varying methods, while causality remains unsettled. This study used a natural experiment to estimate the causal effects of the new metro interventions on housing premiums in Shenzhen, China. We used metro planning knowledge, reasoning on pursuits in land finance and engineering efficiency to verify the as-if randomness of the treatment–control group assignment in the natural experiment to reinforce the power of causal inference. We applied hedonic difference-in-difference (DID) models to estimate the average treatment effects based on the longitudinal housing price and rent data. We found that housing rents increased significantly and consistently after the metro entered operation, but the price premium varied. In addition, the rent premiums around new metro lines showed a price gradient over the distance to stations. Our findings provide scientific evidence for designing value capture mechanisms (e.g. value-added property tax and rent revenue) to recover metro investment costs in China.
新地铁线路住房溢价的因果实证对于基础设施投资的融资和治理必不可少。以往的研究已经用不同的方法探究城市轨道交通对住房的影响，但两者的因果关系仍然悬而未决。本研究使用自然实验估计新地铁的建设对中国深圳住房溢价的因果影响。我们利用地铁规划知识、对土地财政追求的推理和工程效率来验证自然实验中处理组与对照组分配的假设随机性，以强化因果推断的说服力。我们应用 Hedonic 双重差分 (DID) 模型，根据纵向房价和租金数据来估计平均处理效果。我们发现，地铁开通后，住房租金显著上升，但住房价格溢价有所不同。此外，新地铁线路周围的租金溢价随着住房与地铁站之间的距离而呈现出价格梯度。我们的研究结果为设计价值捕获机制（例如房地产增值税和租金收入）以收回中国地铁投资成本提供了科学证据。
as-if random, causal inference, housing premium, metro, natural experiment假设随机、因果推断、住房溢价、地铁、自然实验
https://doi.org/10.1177/00420980231208560Character contradiction: The exclusionary nature of preservationist planning restrictions
风貌特征的矛盾：保护主义规划限制的排他性本质
Rachel Gallagher（澳大利亚昆士兰大学）Preservationist planning broadly describes planning instruments that purport to preserve physical qualities of neighbourhoods by preventing demolition of historic dwellings. Here, we analyse land use conversion of almost 6000 lots in Brisbane, Australia, to understand if, and how, preservationist planning impacts the built environment. Results demonstrate that preservationist planning suppresses multi-family housing construction, even where increased density is encouraged by the planning scheme. We suggest that preservationist planning is exclusionary in nature and not solely focused on built heritage, particularly as substantial modifications to existing dwellings are allowed. These findings run counter to the purported aim of built heritage protection and suggest that the preservationist planning framework should be revised.摘要
保护主义规划泛指旨在通过防止拆毁历史性住宅来保护街区物理特性的规划手段。本文分析了澳大利亚布里斯班近6000块土地的用途转换，以了解保护主义规划是否以及如何影响建成环境。结果表明，即使在规划方案鼓励增加密度的情况下，保护主义规划也会抑制多户住宅的建设。我们认为，保护主义规划具有排他性，并不只关注建成遗产，尤其是其允许对现有住宅进行重大改造。这些研究结果与所谓的保护建成遗产的目标是相左的，我们建议对保护主义规划框架进行修订。
Brisbane, built heritage, character zone, densification, exclusionary zoning布里斯班、建成遗产、特色区、密集化、排他性分区
https://doi.org/10.1177/00420980231195218微信号｜USJ_online
Urban Studies期刊官方微信公众号
