《景观设计学》2023年第3期

基于景观的遗产研究与实践

Landscape-based Heritage Research and Practice

（周详，李骥，刘祎绯，《景观设计学》2023年第3期“主编寄语”）

1 关联性视角下的文化景观

“遗产”是受到启蒙思想影响而诞生的现代概念。作为一种文化实践，遗产的本质涉及一系列关于价值的理解与建构，及其不断被纳入规范化的过程^[1]。20世纪后半叶，全球各民族国家被认证的遗产数量激增。联合国教科文组织（UNESCO）于1972年颁布的《保护世界文化和自然遗产公约》（以下简称《公约》）便是在权威遗产话语体系发展和制度化过程中的一座里程碑：它不仅确立了对具有突出普遍价值的文化与自然遗产进行认证和保护的国际制度，还将遗产的存在确定为一个重要国际议题，并以制度化的形式进一步发展始于19世纪的保护理论。与此同时，遗产保护的对象与景观的关联性也逐步加强。《公约》所阐释的遗产保护范畴包括了“人与自然共同的作品”，随后在此基础上产生了“文化景观”这一特定遗产类型。

20世纪初，美国地理学家卡尔·索尔首次明确定义了文化景观。随后，德国地理学家奥托·施吕特在研究区域聚落形态及其科学分类时，呼吁人们充分认识文化在景观形成过程中的作用，并建议明确区分文化景观与自然景观^[2]。这促发人们基于景观与环境的关联性来确定不同的景观区域，并将“文化”与“景观”相结合，进一步拓展了文化景观的概念^[3]。20世纪末，瑞典地理学家唐·米切尔指出“景观的产生机制”才是理解景观的关键。在他看来，景观是一种关于社会或文化关系自然化、再生产和转化的社会–政治过程，因此应当根据在地性的行为、活动和表现来定义景观^[4]。受其影响，美国地理学家肯尼斯·奥维提出景观是人们的文化实践方式及价值变迁的历史，基于景观的遗产研究与实践应当重视景观与地方性、社区和法规习俗的关联性^[5]。因此，“文化景观”概念的提出与发展不仅增强了遗产与景观的关联性，也极大扩展了人们对于遗产价值的认知^[6]。

受上述研究转向的影响，许多拥有文化景观属性的遗产日益受到关注，“文化景观遗产”一词也逐渐出现在相关研究与实践中。在遗产的性质层面，文化景观逐渐扩展为一种促进景观管理和遗产保护的途径；在遗产的范畴上，文化景观则扩大到区域空间尺度，并突破精英化的价值认定，开始将日常景观甚至是退化的景观纳入研究。这与2000年颁布的《欧洲景观公约》中强调的通过关联性视角看待景观的理念，以及2008年发布的《什么是突出普遍价值》报告中指出的可能越来越多提名列入《世界遗产名录》的遗产不再是传统意义上的文物古迹的理念等相符。2020年，《中华人民共和国文物保护法（修订草案）》首次明确了文化景观等新型文物类型的法定保护地位，这标志着关联性视角下的文化景观研究已经进入到一个全新的时代。

2 整体性视角下的历史性城市景观

2021年，UNESCO的《关于历史性城市景观的建议书》颁布10周年。在全球一体化浪潮的冲击下，众多城市的文化遗产和历史格局被侵蚀，城市记忆与城市特质正在变得模糊。随着遗产保护与现代发展的矛盾冲突在国际社会不断升级，历史性城市景观（Historic Urban Landscape，HUL）概念的提出旨在将遗产保护的重心进行转移——从保护纪念性建筑转移到构筑城市生活的城市价值，从而将文化遗产纳入城市空间发展的核心内容^[7]。作为遗产研究领域近年来的新思潮，HUL超越了传统“历史中心”的概念，涵盖了更为丰富的城市背景及其地理环境；其不仅有助于理解城市历史地段的全生命周期，还提供了一种在保护与发展的矛盾中指导历史景观相关工作的整体性方法，是遗产保护领域受到景观理念影响的典型研究与实践代表^[8]。

国际上，世界遗产中心与亚太地区世界遗产培训与研究中心（WHITRAP）率先推动了HUL在文化遗产保护中的实践应用。代表性试点项目包括东非斯瓦希里海岸世界遗产城市保护（如莫桑比克岛、桑吉巴尔石头城和拉穆古城），欧洲城市保护发展（如荷兰阿姆斯特丹、意大利那不勒斯），以及WHITRAP全球性试点项目（如巴基斯坦拉瓦尔品第、厄瓜多尔昆卡、澳大利亚巴拉瑞特、中国上海和苏州）。近年来，HUL的研究和实践也更多地被纳入中国北京、平遥和丽江等历史文化名城的保护规划工作中^[9]~[11]。这类实践尝试从景观载体的角度解读景观的概念及其方法内涵，囊括了要素、价值、相关群体和执行程序等方面；也进一步明确了文化遗产保护不仅要关注遗产的价值保护与传承体系，还要提升居民的生活品质和遗产管理能力，并将遗产资源纳入城市发展的整体规划框架^[12]。

3 多元化视角下的遗产与景观

2022年是《公约》诞生50周年。从最初的一纸共识到今天由一系列术语、规范与制度构成的复杂体系，世界遗产已经成为人类文明赓续和世界可持续发展的风向标之一。纵观世界遗产的发展进程，从对“历史风貌”的完美复原，转向对“城市景观”的动态管控；当代遗产保护在注重历史纵向“历时性”过程的同时，还应关注每一个时间断面上景观要素的“共时性”和空间特性。景观的概念自诞生之日起便具有综合性与关联性的特征。景观的综合性视野推动着文化遗产保护方法不断发展，催生出更具关联性、整体性和动态性的文化遗产保护实践。在西方文化语境中，景观和审美实践总是与特定的意识形态相关联，从而使景观产生文化、美学与社会学上的意义。在这种语境下，景观不仅承载着传统的社会审美价值，经济、文化、生态等要素在景观维度上展现出关联性^[13]。而在全球城市化的语境中，景观强调在遗产保护与管理过程中对于经济、社会、文化和自然空间层积性的整体把握，是多学科知识体系交叉运用的整体观的集中体现。因此，基于景观的遗产研究与实践有助于人们更好地理解以地方性为基础的人与环境的互动及其动态过程与管理，以及公众参与的这类互动的可能性和挑战^[14]。

从“文化遗产”到“文化景观”，从“历史城市”到“历史性城市景观”，基于景观的遗产研究与实践作为一种理念与方法，正在建构起一个丰富的学术体系。对于自然与文化关系的思辨，产生了文化景观的概念；对于空间和交流的理解，催生出文化线路与遗产廊道的类型；对于传统与现代之间矛盾的调和，衍生出HUL的观点；对于城乡二元发展困境与出路的关怀，则促成乡村景观遗产与可持续发展议题的广泛讨论。近几十年来，景观已经成为风景园林学、城乡规划学、建筑学、文化地理学、考古学、生态学、心理学、社会学等学科的研究对象。这一发展趋势进一步增强了景观研究的综合性与多元性，相关领域的研究和实践也明显呈现出学科交叉、多方参与和多元共治的特点。

4 面向未来的遗产景观研究

近年来，数字技术在遗产研究与实践中扮演着愈发重要的角色。以物联网、大数据和人工智能为代表的新基建、新数据、新方法的迅猛发展正深刻地影响、改变着城市及人们看待城市的方式，并为基于景观的遗产研究与实践带来了变革可能。2017年，第19届国际古迹遗址理事会全体会议将“数字赋权时代的文化遗产保护和阐释”作为会议核心议题之一，这表明数字化保护已成为当代遗产景观研究和实践的新兴领域与重要趋势。卡尔·杜尔施等人^[15]的研究发现，人们对于视觉环境中的地理信息特征非常敏感；通过建构一种以地理文化视觉参照为基础的“计算性地理文化建模”方法，发现数字技术可以帮助我们更好地回应遗产保护的基本问题——人们如何理解和使用历史空间，历史空间又以何种方式影响人群的行为。信息技术支持下的遗产景观研究是数字化时代遗产保护中最具成长潜力的学术领域之一，而依托数字技术对遗产景观的空间要素与景观特征进行量化解析将有助于拓展传统遗产研究的广度与深度。

当前，全球城市化进程中的城市保护与发展之间的矛盾胶着不下。保护历史性空间结构、维持传统社区网络与促进社会经济发展等依旧是HUL需要重点关注和持续疏解的核心城市问题。尽管数字技术的研究潜力巨大，但仍存在一些在技术层面的基本问题，包括如何确定遗产景观的价值、真实性与完整性。而在这些问题面前，数字技术只能作为辅助研究的工具。如何利用新技术加深对遗产景观的理解、提升遗产管理效率、实现遗产信息向后代的传播等是需要我们持续探索的共同议题。

1  Understanding Cultural Landscape From the Relevance Perspective

“Heritage” is a modern concept inspired by the Enlightenment. As a cultural practice, the nature of heritage involves a range of understandings and building of values, as well as the process of becoming norms^[1]. The number of designated heritages in different national-states worldwide has risen since the latter half of the 20th century. The UNESCO Convention Concerning the Protection of the World Cultural and Natural Heritage (“the Convention” hereafter) developed in 1972 is a milestone in the development and institutionalization history of the authoritative heritage discourse—it has not only established an international certification and protection system for natural and cultural heritages with outstanding universal values, but also promoted the existence of heritage towards an important international issue and institutionalized the conservation ethic dating back to the 19th century. Meanwhile, heritage protection objects witnessed a stronger relevance to landscape. Demonstrated in the Convention, heritage includes the “combined works of nature and man,” which gave rise to cultural landscape, a special heritage type.

In the early 20th century, Carl Sauer, an American geographer, first explicitly defined cultural landscape; subsequently, Otto Schlüter, a German geographer, stressed the role of culture in forming landscapes and suggested a distinction between cultural landscapes and natural landscapes^[2] in the study of regional settlement patterns and their scientific categorization. His idea prompted the identification of different landscape areas based on the relevance between landscape and environment, and the enrichment of the connotation of cultural landscape by combining “culture” and “landscape”^[3]. At the end of the 20th century, Swedish geographer Don Mitchell pointed out that “the mechanics of landscape production” is the key to understanding landscape^[4]. In his view, landscape, as a cultural practice, is a socio-political process of naturalizing, reproducing, and transforming social or cultural relations, thus landscape should be defined according to the locals’ behaviors, activities, and performances^[4]. Influenced by such ideas, American geographer Kenneth Olwig proposed that landscapes are the history of humans’ cultural practices and changes of values, and the landscape-based heritage research and practice should emphasize landscape’s relevance to locality, community, regulations, and customs^[5]. Therefore, the proposal and development of cultural landscape has enhanced the relevance between heritage and landscape, and greatly expanded people’s perception of heritage values^[6].

The research evolution above has been accompanied with the increasing attention on heritages with cultural landscape attributes, and the term “cultural landscape heritage” has emerged in relevant research and practice. To the nature of heritage, cultural landscape becomes an approach to promoting landscape management and heritage conservation; while to the scope of heritage, cultural landscape expands to regional scales and goes beyond the elitist valuation towards focusing on ordinary landscapes or even degraded landscapes. This is in line with the idea of interpreting landscape from the relevance perspective (as emphasized in the European Landscape Convention issued in 2000) and the notion that more and more nominated properties in World Heritage List may not be the monuments in a traditional sense (as highlighted in the Outstanding Universal Value published in 2008). The Law of the People’s Republic of China on the Protection of Cultural Relics (Revised Draft) publicized in November 2020 firstly clarified the legal protection status of the new types of cultural relics (e.g., cultural landscapes), opening a new horizon for the research on cultural landscapes from the relevance perspective.

2  Interpreting Historic Urban Landscape From the Holism Perspective

The year 2021 marks the 10th anniversary of UNESCO’s Recommendation on the Historic Urban Landscape. Under the impact of globalization, numerous cities’ cultural heritage and historical patterns have been eroded, losing urban memories and urban identities. As the conflicts between heritage conservation and modern development escalate in global society, the concept of Historic Urban Landscape (HUL) was proposed to shift the emphasis of heritage conservation from the protection of monumental architecture to the construction of city life and values, so as to incorporate cultural heritage into the core of urban spatial development^[7]. As a new trend among recent heritage studies, HUL transcends the traditional history-centered notion to encompass a more inclusive urban context and geographical environment. HUL not only helps understand the full life cycle of historic urban areas, but also provides a holistic approach to guiding the practice about historic landscapes amidst the contradictions between conservation and development. Influenced by the concept of landscape, HUL offers a paradigm for the research and practice of heritage conservation^[8].

Internationally, the World Heritage Centre and the World Heritage Institute of Training and Research for the Asia and the Pacific Region (WHITRAP) take the lead in promoting the application of HUL in cultural heritage conservation practice. Representative pilot projects include the World Heritage-designated cities on the Swahili Coast in East Africa (e.g., the Island of Mozambique, Stone Town in Zanzibar, Lamu in Kenya); European historic cities (e.g., Amsterdam in Netherlands, Naples in Italy), and WHITRAP pilot cities (e.g., Rawalpindi in Pakistan, Cuenca in Ecuador, Ballarat in Australia, Shanghai and Suzhou in China). Recently, the research and practice of HUL have also been integrated in the conservation planning of historical and cultural cities/towns in China such as Beijing, Pingyao, and Lijiang^[9]~[11]. Such practices interpret the connotation of landscape regarding landscape as a medium, covering elements, values, stakeholders, and implementation procedures, and also clarify that cultural heritage conservation should focus on the value preservation and inheritance system and improve citizens’ life quality and their heritage management ability, so as to integrate heritage resource into the overall planning of urban development.^[12]

3  Exploring Heritage and Landscape From the Diversity Perspective

The year 2022 enters the 50th anniversary of the Convention. From an initial consensus to today’s complex system of terms, norms, and institutions, World Heritage has symbolized human civilization continuance and the world’s sustainable development. The development of World Heritage has shifted from the integral restoration of “historic landscape” to the dynamic management of “urban landscapes.” Not only should the contemporary heritage conservation focus on the diachronicity of history, but it also needs to pay attention to the synchronicity and spatial characteristics of landscape elements in each temporal section. The concept of landscape emphasizes holism and relevance since its emergence. The holism perspective drives the advance of cultural heritage conservation methods, leading to practices of greater relevance, holism, and dynamics. In Western cultural contexts, landscapes and aesthetic practices are always associated with certain ideologies that give cultural, aesthetic, and sociological meaning to landscapes. Thus, landscape carries traditional social aesthetic values and exhibits the relevance to economy, culture, and ecology^[13]. In the context of global urbanization, landscape emphasizes a holistic understanding of economic, social, cultural, and natural spaces in heritage conservation and management, and a holistic view that combines and applies multidisciplinary knowledge hierarchies. Thus, landscape-based heritage research and practice contribute to a better exploration of human-environment interactions upon locality and the related dynamics and management, as well as the possibilities and challenges of public participation in such interactions^[14].

From “cultural heritage” to “cultural landscape,” from historic city to historic urban landscape, landscape-based heritage research and practice, as a concept and a method, are constructing a productive academic system. The speculation of the relationship between nature and culture led to the birth of cultural landscape concept; the understanding of spaces and communications enriched the typologies of cultural routes and heritage corridors; the mediation of the conflicts between the traditional and the modern stimulated the views on HUL; and the concerns on the urban-rural dichotomy resulted in an extensive discussion about rural landscape heritage and sustainable development. In recent decades, landscape has been studied by different disciplines including landscape architecture, urban and rural planning, architecture, cultural geography, archaeology, ecology, psychology, and sociology. This trend enhances the synthesis and diversity of landscape research, and also promotes multi-disciplinary studies, multi-stakeholder participation, and multi-entity governance in associated fields.

4 Heritage Landscape Research Towards Future

Recently, digital technology plays an increasingly important role in heritage research and practice. New infrastructure, data, and approaches (e.g., the Internet of Things, big data, and artificial intelligence) are profoundly changing the city and the ways we see the city. All of these are bringing existing opportunities to landscape-based heritage research and practice. The International Council on Monuments and Sites (ICOMOS) General Assembly took “protecting and interpreting cultural heritage in the age of digital empowerment” as one of the core topics, suggesting that digital conservation has become an emerging interest in contemporary heritage landscape research and practice. Carl Doersch et al.^[15] found that people are sensitive to the geo-informative characteristics of visual environment. Through computational geo-cultural modeling that is featured with geo-cultural visual reference, their research shows that digital technology can help us better respond to basic questions in heritage conservation—how to understand and utilize historical space, and how historical space affects people’s behaviors. In digital era, heritage landscape research supported by information technology is of great potential, and quantitative research of the spatial elements and characteristics of heritage landscapes will help improve traditional heritage research in width and depth.

At present, conflicts between urban conservation and development still intensify along with global urbanization. HUL needs to keep its focus on the preservation of historic spatial structures, maintenance of traditional community networks, and promotion of socio-economic development. Despite its promising potential, digital technology is still inadequate to respond to fundamental technical problems, for example, how to determine the value, authenticity, and integrity of heritage landscapes. In other words, digital technology at present can only be an assistive tool to our research. How to utilize new technologies to deepen our understanding of heritage landscapes, to enhance the efficiency of heritage management, and to keep and spread the heritage information and knowledge to future generations are common issues that need to be continuously explored.

REFERENCES

[1]   Smith, L. (2006). Use of Heritage. Routledge.

[2]   Whitehead, J. (1981). Urban Landscape: Historical Development and Management. Academic Press Inc.

[3]   Conzen, M. P. (1990). The Making of the American Landscape. Routledge.

[4]   Mitchell, D. (1994). Landscape and surplus value: The making of the ordinary in Brentwood, CA. Environment and Planning D: Society and Space, (12), 7–30.

[5]   Olwig K. R. (1996). Recovering the substantive nature of landscape. Annals of the Association of American Geographers, 86(4), 630–653.

[6]   Liu, Y. (2015). Three dimensionalities of value inspired by cultural landscape: Take World Heritage Cultural Landscape as example. Landscape Architecture, (8), 50–55.

[7]   Li, J., Jing, F., & Shao, Y. (2022). Global practices of the UNESCO Historic Urban Landscape: Ten-year review and insights for Chinese urban heritage protection. City Planning Review, 46(11), 90–98.

[8]   Liu, Y. (2017). Historic Urban Landscape. Landscape Architecture, (6), 4–5.

[9]   Li, J., Krishnamurthy, S., Pereira Roders, A. R., & van Weswmael, P. (2021). Imagine the Old Town of Lijiang: Contextualising community participation for urban heritage management in China. Habitat International, (108), 102321.

[10]       Lv, Z. (2022). Cognition and protection of Beijing central axis from the perspective of Historic Urban Landscape. Landscape Architecture. 29(4), 20–25.

[11]       Shao, Y., Hu, L., & Zhao, J. (2016). A research on the conservation plan of the human-habitat World Heritage: Case study of Pingyao Ancient City. Urban Planning Forum, (5), 94–102.

[12]       Veldpaus, L., & Pereira Roders, A. R. (2017). Historic Urban Landscape Approach as a Tool for Sustainable Urban Heritage Management. In: S. Asikainen, C. Brites, K. Plebańczyk, L. Rogač Mijatović, & K. Soini (Eds.), Culture in Sustainability: Towards a Transdiciplinary Approach (pp. 62–74). University of Jyväskylä.

[13]       Zhou, X., Liu, Z., & Shi, J. (2022). Evaluation on visual landscape perception under the support of digital footprint: A case study of Historic Urban Landscape of the Qinhuai River Area. Landscape Architecture, 29(9), 18–25.

[14]       Stenseke M. (2018). Connecting ‘relational values’ and relational landscape approaches. Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability, (35), 82–88.

[15]       Doersch, C., Singh, S., Gupta, A., Sivic, J. & Efros, A. A. (2012). What makes Paris look like Paris?. ACM Transactions on Graphics, 31(4), 1–9.

主编寄语

基于景观的遗产研究与实践／周详，李骥，刘祎绯

论文

基于历史性城市景观与数字足迹视角的遗产廊道选线方法——以中国南京市历史城区为例／周详，汤雨杭，苏俊吉

基于多元利益群体支付意愿的国家公园景观资源价值货币化核算评估／王鹏，何友均，李乐，李楠，谢和生，杨欣，沈伟航

中国大熊猫国家公园社会影响评估研究——基于界内、门户和边缘社区的比较分析／张雨琦，张引

观点与评论

历史性城市景观范式——平衡城市保护过程中价值与变化的工具／肯·泰勒

基于历史环境保护与再生视角探索当前城市化的新途径——对话窪田亚矢／窪田亚矢

从人、空间传记和生态系统视角探究基于景观的城市遗产保护方法／李骥，傅厚苇，彼得·范·韦斯梅尔

文化遗产管理的灵活性：如何在动态变化过程中提升应对不确定性的可持续和韧性适应能力／马蒂亚斯·里普，塞巴斯蒂安·丹尼尔

探索与过程

在建造与非建造之间——面向物种共存、物质循环和传统生态知识的跨学科设计方法／徐之成，贺梦琪

【中文刊名】《景观设计学》

【英文刊名】Landscape Architecture Frontiers

【作者】周详（ZHOU Xiang），李骥（LI Ji），刘祎绯（LIU Yifei）等

【出版社】高等教育出版社有限公司

【页码】138页彩色印刷

【刊号】ISSN 2096-336X

【出版日期】2023年6月

基于历史性城市景观与数字足迹视角的遗产廊道选线方法——以中国南京市历史城区为例

Heritage Corridor Routing Method From Historic Urban Landscape and Digital Footprint Perspectives—The Case of Historical Urban Area in Nanjing, China

作者：周详，汤雨杭，苏俊吉 Xiang ZHOU, Yuhang TANG, Junji SU

摘要

遗产廊道作为一种串联历史文化与自然景观资源的系统性保护方法，融合了人文环境与自然环境，可以为公众提供休闲娱乐、游憩健身等活动的连续线性空间。传统的遗产廊道选线研究大多聚焦于分析物质空间条件，忽略了公众感知表达和公共参与机制。基于历史性城市景观理念挖掘与传统遗产内容紧密关联的现代景观资源，通过解析游憩者的数字足迹，将人群游憩行为偏好与空间感知纳入遗产廊道选线过程，可实现城市物理语义选线与社会语义选线的结合。基于此，本研究包括三个部分：1）通过数字足迹分析，将城市传统遗产与景观资源点纳入遗产廊道选线过程，通过最小累积阻力模型拟合物理语义选线结果；2）利用数字足迹中的人群流动轨迹与网络文本信息构建共词矩阵，完成社会语义选线；3）耦合物理语义选线与社会语义选线结果，结合实际情况优化遗产廊道选线结果。研究实现了在遗产廊道选线过程中，将城市景观资源与公众游憩行为和空间感知的有效整合，有利于城市遗产的整体保护与公共空间的系统提升。

关键词

遗产廊道；选线；历史性城市景观；最小累积阻力模型；数字足迹；社会网络模型；城市景观资源

Abstract 

As a method of the systematic conservation of historical, cultural, and natural landscape resources, heritage corridor integrates contexts of humanism and nature and provides the public with continuous linear spaces for recreation, leisure, and fitness activities. Most traditional studies on heritage corridor route planning focus on the analysis of physical spatial conditions, while ignoring public perception and public participation mechanisms. Based on the concept of Historic Urban Landscape, this research excavates modern landscape resources that are closely connected with traditional heritages and analyzes users’ digital footprints to incorporate public preferences of recreational behaviors into the process of heritage corridor route planning, realizing the combination of physical and social semantic data analyses. Basically, this study consists of three parts: 1) through analysis of digital footprints, select urban traditional heritage sites and landscape resource spots into the process of heritage corridor route planning, and fit the preliminary routes of urban heritage corridors with minimum cumulative resistance model; 2) construct a co-word matrix consisting of users’ movement flows and online textual data in the digital footprints, to complete the route planning upon social semantic data analysis; and 3) superimpose the results of heritage corridor route planning generated by the above two steps, and optimize according to the reality of urban environment. The study realizes an effective integration of urban landscape resources with public recreational behaviors and spatial perception in the process of heritage corridor route planning, offering reference to the overall protection of urban heritages and the systematic improvement of public space.

Keywords

Heritage Corridor; Route Planning; Historic Urban Landscape; Minimum Cumulative Resistance Model; Digital Footprint; Social Network Model; Urban Landscape Resources

基于多元利益群体支付意愿的国家公园景观资源价值货币化核算评估

Monetized Evaluation of Landscape Resources of National Parks Based on the Willingness to Pay of Multiple Interest Groups

作者：王鹏，何友均，李乐，李楠，谢和生，杨欣，沈伟航 Peng WANG, Youjun HE, Le LI, Nan LI, Hesheng XIE, Xin YANG, Weihang SHEN

摘要

国家公园是我国自然景观最独特的国土空间之一。科学评估景观资源价值对于实现国家公园原真性与完整性的保护具有重要作用。本文以钱江源国家公园体制试点区为例，采用条件价值法，通过调研内部群体（社区居民与管理人员）和外部群体（外来游客）对假想市场项目的支付意愿，对该国家公园景观资源价值进行货币化核算评估，并在此基础上采用Logistic回归模型分析影响景观资源价值的关键因素。结果显示，外部群体支付率高于内部群体，且不同特征的人群具有不同的支付率。改善生态环境是不同群体愿意为假想市场项目进行支付的主要原因，但拒绝支付的原因存在明显差异，自身收入低是导致内部群体拒绝支付的主要原因，认为假想市场项目应由财政支付是外部群体拒绝支付的主要原因。研究区域景观资源价值为1.35亿元，其中，外部价值明显高于内部价值，而态度因素比人口和环境因素对景观资源价值的影响更大。国家公园景观资源价值受到多元利益群体的认知、诉求和利益驱动的影响，研究建议加快构建标准化核算评估技术体系，为中国的国家公园体系建设提供支撑。

关键词

国家公园；景观资源价值；货币化核算评估；支付意愿；多元利益群体

Abstract 

In China, national parks represent the country’s most unique natural landscapes. Scientific evaluation of landscape resources is significant for preserving the authenticity and integrity of national parks. Taking Qianjiangyuan National Park System Pilot Zone as an example, this research investigated the willingness of internal group (residents and administrative staff) and external group (tourists) to pay for a hypothetical market project based on the pilot zone via Contingent Valuation Method to acquire the monetized value of landscape resources in the national park, and applied Logistic Regression to analyze the influencing factors. The results show that the payment rate of external group is higher than that of internal group, and people with different demographics have different payment rates. Both internal and external groups are willing to pay to improve ecological environment, but there are significant differences on reasons for refusal—having a low income is the main reason for the internal group, and the external respondents refuse mainly because of the belief that the payment is owed to government finance. The total monetized value of the research area is 135 million yuan, of which the external value is much higher than internal value. The attitude factors influence landscape resource value more significantly than demographic and environmental factors. The assessment of landscape resource value of national parks is affected by perceptions and demands of multiple interest groups. This research suggests accelerating the construction of a standardized assessment technical system to support the establishment of national park system in China.

Keywords

National Park; Landscape Resources Value; Monetized Evaluation; Willingness to Pay; Multiple Interest Groups

中国大熊猫国家公园社会影响评估研究——基于界内、门户和边缘社区的比较分析

Social Impact Assessment of the Giant Panda National Park in China: A Comparative Analysis of the Inside, Gateway, and Fringe Communities

作者：张雨琦，张引 Yuqi ZHANG, Yin ZHANG

摘要

社会影响评估是国家公园体制建设的现实需求，但相关概念框架、理论认识和系统评估仍不足。基于中国国家公园体制建设的特征，本文优化了社会影响评估框架和指标体系，选择中国大熊猫国家公园（唐家河园区）周边的三类典型社区——界内社区、门户社区和边缘社区进行比较分析。通过问卷调查、半结构化访谈、因子分析和单因素方差分析，研究发现：1）大熊猫国家公园综合社会影响感知偏消极，村民对各项维度影响的感知程度由高到低依次为：社会关系、地方文化、平等权利、经济生计和知识教育维度；2）三类社区对经济生计维度以外维度影响的感知存在显著差异：门户社区对社会关系、地方文化、平等权利维度的感知最为积极，界内社区对知识教育维度的感知最为积极，边缘社区在四个维度都最为消极；3）社会影响分异主要受保护政策、产业经济、区位交通等因素影响。研究认为，在关注经济发展的同时，应当增加对平等权利、知识教育等非经济类社会影响的关注；需要对边缘社区给予特别关注和支持，以确保其在国家公园建设和发展过程中能够持续受益。本研究可为相关自然保护地社会影响的优化提供理论借鉴和案例依据。

关键词

国家公园；自然保护地；社会影响评估；感知；界内社区；门户社区；边缘社区；唐家河国家级自然保护区

Abstract 

Social impact assessment is a practical requirement for the construction of the national park system, but there is still a lack of comprehensive conceptual frameworks, theoretical explanations, and systematic evaluations. Considering the distinctive characteristics of China’s national park system construction, this study improves the existing framework and indicator system for social impact assessment. It conducts a comparative analysis of three typical communities—the inside community, gateway community, and fringe community—surrounding the Giant Panda National Park (Tangjiahe area). Through questionnaire surveys, semi-structured interviews, factor analysis, and One-way ANOVA analysis, we find that the comprehensive perception value of social impacts by the Giant Panda National Park was relatively negative. Respondents’ perception values ranked from high to low were social relations, local culture, equity and rights, economy and livelihoods, and knowledge and education. Moreover, except the dimension of economy and livelihoods, there were significant differences in the perception of impacts by the three types of communities. Specifically, the gateway community has the most positive perception of social relations, local culture, and equity and rights; the inside community has the most positive perception of knowledge and education; while the fringe community perceived the most negative impacts in all four dimensions. Furthermore, the primary causes of social impact perception are conservation policies, economic development, and location and transportation. This study suggests that non-economic social impacts should be given more attention, such as equity and rights, and knowledge and education. Also, to ensure that the fringe communities can benefit from the construction and development of national parks, more attention and support from the governments and management agencies are necessary. This study can provide theoretical insights and case-based evidence for the improvement of social impact discussions on protected areas.

Keywords

National Park; Protected Area; Social Impact Assessment; Perception; Inside Community; Gateway Community; Fringe Community; Tangjiahe National Nature Reserve

历史性城市景观范式——平衡城市保护过程中价值与变化的工具

Historic Urban Landscape Paradigm—A Tool for Balancing Values and Changes in the Urban Conservation Process

作者：肯·泰勒 Ken TAYLOR

摘要

今天，全世界一半以上的人口在城市中居住，这在人类历史上是前所未有的。相应地，过去二十年来，城市保护已逐渐成为文化遗产保护领域中的一大研究热点。这样的转变是具有时代意义的，因为与快速城市化相伴而来的是经济发展及优先参与全球经济的巨大压力。当前，许多社会的经济发展都以现代化建设为主导，导致传统社区不断消失。与此同时，城市保护领域的重点仍集中在著名建筑和古迹上，并未将城市视为由价值和信仰体系构成的人类社区——这些价值和信仰体系反映在城市的整体环境中，即城市的文化景观。本文所聚焦的历史性城市景观途径旨在通过批判性地讨论城市社区，以及它们之于人类记忆和认同感的重要意义，转变城市保护的传统观念。这其中还涉及乡愁在城市保护研究领域的作用：乡愁这一现象，在理解过去对现在及未来社会和政治议程发展的影响时为何如此重要？本文特从历史性城市景观的范式出发，为审视城市提供了新的思路。

关键词

历史性城市景观；文化景观；城市遗产；城市保护；历史城市；城市文化景观次级景点；创意产业

Abstract 

Today, for the first time in human history, more than half of the world’s population lives in cities. Coincidentally, within the field of cultural heritage conservation, increasing international interest and attention over the past two decades has been focused on urban areas. This is timely because the pressure for economic development and for the prioritizing of engagement with the global economy have accompanied rapid urbanization. In many societies, economic development has privileged modernization efforts leading to the loss of traditional communities. Accompanying this has been a concentration in the field of urban conservation on famous buildings and monuments rather than seeing cities as communities of people with values and belief systems that are reflected in a city’s overall setting: its cultural landscape. The Historic Urban Landscape approach is intended to address this distinction by critically discussing city communities, and how they are reservoirs of human memory and identity. This raises the question of the role of nostalgia in the field of urban conservation studies: is nostalgia an important phenomenon in understanding how the past is both brought to bear on the present and on the development of social and political agendas for the future? This article explores alternative ways of seeing cities particularly through the Historic Urban Landscape paradigm.

Keywords

Historic Urban Landscape; Cultural Landscape;  Urban Heritage; Urban Conservation; Historic Cities; Secondary Urban Cultural Landscape Attractions; Creative Industries

基于历史环境保护与再生视角探索当前城市化的新途径——对话窪田亚矢

To Explore an Alternative Urbanization That Is Different From the Present Through Historical Environment Preservation and Regeneration—An Interview With Aya Kubota

作者：窪田亚矢 Aya KUBOTA

摘要

在本次访谈中，窪田亚矢以自己在日本的实践为例，分享了对历史环境保护和再生的思考。在她看来，地方主体性十分重要。地方化所具有的活力不仅为历史环境的保护和再生提供了支持，也为城市化途径提供了另一种可能。在这类实践中，地方主体和非地方主体之间可能会存在冲突，但这种冲突是有益的。就“灾难遗产”的保护和利用而言，窪田认为，城市规划将历史环境纳入考量是一个重大进步。在规划过程中，应当让当地居民参与进来，共同探讨应该保护什么、如何保护，以及为谁而保护。在城市历史资源的再生方面，最大的挑战是需要审视我们的生活现状并重新评估我们的价值。虽然专业人士的参与难免有风险，但他们有必要采取措施来保护或修复历史环境，在这一过程中，能够从当地居民的视角来思考问题也非常重要。

关键词

历史环境；保护与再生；城市化；地方化；地方主体性；日本；文化景观

Abstract 

Aya Kubota stands out in studies of community development projects ranging from small historical towns to major metropolitan areas, covering topics on urban planning, townscape preservation, and environmental improvement and conservation, etc. In this interview, she shares thoughts on historical environment preservation and regeneration, taking her practices in Japan for example. From her point of view, local subjectivity is essential. The dynamism of localization supports the preservation and regeneration practices, presenting an alternative way of urbanization. There might be conflicts between the local and non-local subjects in such practices, but the conflicts are healthy. Regarding the preservation and utilization of the “Legacy of Catastrophe,” she holds that city planning taking historical environments into consideration is an important progress. It is vital to engage local residents in the planning process and weigh up what should be preserved, how should they be conveyed, and to whom. For the regeneration of urban historical resources, the most challenging aspect is the need to examine the current situations, where our lives and ways of life have been completely influenced by external forces, and reevaluate our values. Although there are always risks associated with professional involvement, it is necessary to take some measures to preserve or repair the historical environments, in which process the ability to think as own self as the local residents is an important ability.

Keywords

Historical Environment; Preservation and Regeneration; Urbanization; Localization; Local Subjectivity; Japan; Cultural Landscape

从人、空间传记和生态系统视角探究基于景观的城市遗产保护方法

A Landscape-based Approach to Urban Heritage Management: People, Spatial Biography, and Ecosystem

作者：李骥，傅厚苇，彼得·范·韦斯梅尔 Ji LI, Houwei FU, Pieter VAN WESEMAEL

摘要

本文首先提出，当前的“城市遗产”定义既涵盖“旧的”古代遗迹，也包含“新的”近现代纪念物。对城市遗产的保护也不再单纯聚焦于其“旧的”价值，而转向一个更具整体性的过程——既要保留古代“旧”价值，也要随着遗产的适应性再利用而不断调整，以获得当代“新”价值，进而向着更加以人为中心、以景观为基础的方向发展。此外，本文还在城市规划和发展中引入“生态系统”概念，该概念涉及人类、动植物群落、空间传记及其他无形和有形环境，旨在发展可持续的人类栖息地。在对人类栖息地这一生态系统进行管理时，首先需要保护地方特性，因为它代表了历史性城市景观的有形和无形属性。同时，公众参与是城市遗产保护的重要实施工具，而专家学者在实践中需利用基于景观的保护方法，结合数字技术，为扩展服务、共创价值及构建公民主导的决策途径（如社交媒体、游戏化的应用程序和数字城市公地）开辟新路径。通过公众参与还可以更好地识别当地的空间传记，将人们的足迹从社区延伸到城市肌理中微观尺度下的个体上。最后，本文建议景观设计师与城市规划师和遗产保护专业人员通力协作，将遗产资源融入城市长期可持续的发展规划体系中。

关键词

城市遗产保护；历史性城市景观；基于景观的方法；公众参与；城市生态系统；空间传记

Abstract 

This article first identifies the current definition of urban heritage that includes both “old” and “young” monuments. Their protection has also shifted from solely preserving “old” values into a more holistic process to retain “old” values and manage the change in their adaptive reuse to gain “new” values, towards a more people-centered and landscape-based approach. Furthermore, a concept of ecosystem for urban planning and development is introduced, involving both the worlds of people, flora and fauna, and the sphere of spatial biography as well as other (in)tangible contexts, aiming to develop sustainable human habitats. The management of the change in human habitats as an ecosystem is built on the protection of place identity, which is the manifestation of historic urban landscape’s tangible and intangible attributes. Public participation is also recognized to be an important tool. To implement such a landscape-based approach, experts need to play an active role in promoting wide public participation while digital technologies open new ways for outreach, co-creation, and citizen-led decision-making platforms such as social media, (gamified) apps, and digital urban commons. Through public participation, local spatial biography can also be better identified, which extends people’s footprints from the community to local individuals at micro-scaled features within urban tissues. Finally, this article proposes recommendations for landscape architects to share the responsibilities of urban planners and heritage professionals, integrating heritage management into long-term sustainable urban development.

Keywords

Urban Heritage Management; Historic Urban Landscape; Landscape-based Approach; Public Participation; Urban Ecosystem; Spatial Biography

文化遗产管理的灵活性：如何在动态变化过程中提升应对不确定性的可持续和韧性适应能力

Agility in Cultural Heritage Management—Advancing Competence Within Uncertainty as a Sustainable and Resilient Adaptation to Processes of Dynamic Change

作者：马蒂亚斯·里普，塞巴斯蒂安·丹尼尔 Matthias RIPP, Sebastian DANIEL

摘要

现代社会的迅猛变化及随之而来的挑战与日俱增，其中最主要的问题根源正是气候变化。然而，我们对待文化遗产的方式仍然深受保护叙事的影响。当变化已成常态，文化遗产管理在文化挪用、归还、主人翁意识和公众参与等方面的问题都激发人们对静态的文化遗产概念提出质疑。本文旨在基于保护与变化的相互作用提出新的解决方案。鉴于这些挑战对当今社会造成的心理影响，本文认为，文化遗产专家需要提升应对不确定性和包容模糊性的能力，以便采取更为明智的举措。通过汲取多个学科的理念并应用到城市环境研究中，本文倡导系统理解文化遗产，并将之作为可持续和韧性适应当前挑战的先决条件。同时，本文阐释了文化遗产相关行业人士在日常工作中需要哪些知识技能才能自如胜任当前及未来的职业需要。文中所引述的德国雷根斯堡的案例研究通过一种综合的、整体性的方法，将城市视为一个多层系统进行文化遗产管理，为相关研究与实践提供了有益借鉴。最后，本文为文化遗产管理者提供了一系列应对变化和不确定性的指导方针。遗产管理必须以人们的生活品质为核心，使我们的城市成为高品质的宜居场所。

关键词

文化遗产；管理；灵活性；转型；不确定性；可持续性；韧性

Abstract 

The intense changes in our modern society and the associated challenges are constantly increasing, not least due to the meta-crisis of climate change. Yet our approach to cultural heritage is still strongly influenced by the narrative of preservation. The article aims to find solutions within the interplay of preservation and change. Based on the psychological impact on society resulting from the current challenges, it is argued that cultural heritage experts need competencies in dealing with uncertainty and tolerance of ambiguity in order to provide security of action. The article applies insights from multiple disciplines to urban environment studies and advocates for a systemic understanding of cultural heritage as a prerequisite for sustainable and resilient adaptation to current challenges. It also contributes to a body of knowledge on what skills cultural heritage professionals need to be competent and confident in their daily work. The case study provides some valuable examples from Regensburg of Germany by taking an integrated and holistic approach that views the city as a multi-layered system in cultural heritage management.

Keywords

Cultural Heritage; Management; Agility; Transformation; Uncertainty; Sustainability; Resilience

在建造与非建造之间——面向物种共存、物质循环和传统生态知识的跨学科设计方法

Between Building and Unbuilding: An Interdisciplinary Design Approach to Cohabitation, Material Cycles, and Traditional Ecological Knowledge

作者：徐之成，贺梦琪 Zhicheng XU, Mengqi Moon HE

摘要

近代人居环境建设通常强调静态的建成效果和即时效用，因此相似的设计流程不可避免地加速了建成环境的同质化进程。由于资本主义的控制倾向和对效率的追逐，这些设计过程会优先考虑某些特定的文化，而忽略当地特有的知识或生活方式。为了应对不断加剧的、包括全球气候挑战和环境不平等在内的诸多压力，设计领域提出将设计从静态模式向响应模式转变，使之融入自然的转变之中。

“飞来农场”位于美国内华达州半干旱的干盐湖地区，地处偏远，但工业活动纵横交错；气候条件较为极端，但自然界生命力旺盛，当地文化传统而丰富。在很长一段历史里，飞来农场所在的布莱克罗克沙漠区域一直由原住民管理，直至1843年欧洲殖民者的到来开启了暴力冲突和土地侵占的历史。此后不断升级的农业和巨型重工业活动从根本上改变了该地区的生态。针对这些矛盾，将在飞来农场建造的项目“寄宿者”（Lodgers）中提出以“非建造”的途径来代替以人为中心的建筑和景观设计，通过寻求跨学科的设计方式解决该地区的土地侵占和环境退化问题。寄宿者项目提出了三种挑战当代建筑实践的关键方法：首先，优先考虑包括人类在内的所有动植物物种的福祉，并创造物种共存空间；其次，利用当地或周边的建筑资源，尽量减少浪费，保持生态平衡，重塑物质循环周期。最后，将传统生态知识与当代建筑实践相结合，通过采用低技建造方式来鼓励社区参与。随着试点项目进入建设阶段，作者批判性地反思了当代建筑实践和设计过程，并探讨了“非建造”途径在应对气候挑战时的重要意义。

关键词

沙漠；跨学科研究；非建造；寄宿者；物种共存；物质循环；低技术；传统生态知识

Abstract 

In recent history, built environment practices have accepted a paradigm which underlines the land’s static quality, prioritizes immediate utility, and consequently adopts design processes that inevitably accelerate assimilation. With the capitalist propensity to obtain control and enhance efficiency, those processes nevertheless privilege certain cultures while rejecting other forms of knowledge or living specific to the land. The design discourse, confronted with the rising pressure of global climate challenges and environmental inequity, suggests a shift of design pattern from static to responsive as a means to an end that is part of nature’s transformation.

Located amid the semi-arid playa of Nevada in the USA, Fly Ranch sits on land remote yet crisscrossed by industrial activity, with extreme climatic conditions yet teeming with life and traditions. Working with these contradictions, “Lodgers,” the project to be constructed in Fly Ranch, is grounded in three key approaches to challenging contemporary architectural practice. Firstly, prioritize the well-being of all plants and animals species, including humans, by creating cohabitation spaces. Secondly, utilize local or nearby building resources to minimize waste, maintain ecological balance, and rebuild the material cycle. Finally, integrate Traditional Ecological Knowledge with modern building practices and employ low-tech construction techniques to encourage community participation. As a pilot project goes into construction, the authors offer critical reflection on contemporary architecture practice, the design process, and the meaning of “unbuilding” as a response to climate challenge.

Keywords

Desert; Interdisciplinary Studies; Unbuilding; Lodgers; Cohabitation; Material Cycles; Low-tech; Traditional Ecological Knowledge