打印

作者

来源

EUROPEAN URBAN AND REGIONAL STUDIES,Vol.26,Issue2,P.205-223

语言

英文

关键字

Comparative urbanism; peripheral urbanization; smart urbanism; urban infrastructure; urban and spatial planning; CITIES; INNOVATION; INFRASTRUCTURE; INSIGHTS; POLITICS; SYSTEMS; GROWTH; SENSE

作者单位

[de Falco, Stefano] Univ Naples Federico II, Via Toledo 402, I-80128 Naples, Italy. [Angelidou, Margarita] Aristotle Univ Thessaloniki, Thessaloniki, Greece. [Addie, Jean-Paul D.] Georgia State Univ, Atlanta, GA 30303 USA. de Falco, S (reprint author), Univ Naples Federico II, Via Toledo 402, I-80128 Naples, Italy. E-Mail: sdefalco@unina.it

标签

城市化,智慧城市 |

摘要

The "smart city" has risen to global prominence over the past two decades as an urban planning and development strategy. As a broad but contested toolkit of technological services and policy interventions aimed at improving the efficacy and efficiency of urban systems, the "smart city" is subject to several pressing critiques. This paper acknowledges these concerns, but recognizes the potential of "urban intelligence" to enhance the resiliency of metropolitan areas. As such, we focus on an under-researched dimension of smart city urbanism: its application in peripheral urban areas. The paper introduces a threefold typology of: (a) geographic (spatial); (b) hard (material); and (c) soft (social) urban peripherality. Second, it reviews the concept of urban resilience and considers how its central characteristics can inform the objectives and implementation of "smart city" infrastructures and planning. Six European smart city plans are assessed via a qualitative content analysis, to identify the target of smart city actions; the characteristics of urban resilience mobilized; and the spatial focus of planned interventions. The comparative analysis reveals a variegated set of smart-city approaches. Notably, "smart" actions aimed at enhancing social innovation are the most common type of intervention, while overall there remains a strong tendency for smart urbanism to focus on the urban core. We conclude by calling for a research agenda addressing smartness in, of, and for, peripheral urban spaces and communities. 作为一种城市规划和发展战略，“智慧城市”在过去二十年中已成为全球瞩目的焦点。作为一种旨在提高城市系统效力和效率的技术服务和政策干预的内涵广泛但有争议的工具包，“智慧城市”受到几个颇有压力的批评。本文承认了这些问题，但我们认识到，“都市智能”有可能增强大都市区的弹性。因此，我们关注了一个目前尚且研究不足的有关智能城市都市化的研究维度，即它在周边城市区域中的应用。本文介绍了三种类型：（a）地理上的（空间）；（b）硬性的（材料）；（c）软性的（社会）城市周边地带。其次，本文回顾了城市复原力的概念，并考虑其核心特征如何对“智慧城市”基础设施和规划的目标和实施产生影响。本文通过定性内容分析评估六个欧洲智慧城市计划，以确定智慧城市行动的目标；调动起城市复原力的特征；以及计划干预的空间焦点。比较分析揭示了一系列智能城市方法。值得注意的是，旨在加强社会创新的“智能”行动是最常见的干预类型，而总体而言，智能城市化仍然倾向于关注都市核心。我们呼吁制定一项研究议程，以解决周边城市空间和社区的智能问题。