????中國的未來就在于城市的未來，這具有重大意義。到2030年，將有10億中國人在城市居住，城市是這個國家經(jīng)濟增長的引擎。因此，這些城市的形態(tài)將決定中國的發(fā)展程度。中國的能源模式、用水甚至農(nóng)業(yè)都將受到所選擇的城市形態(tài)的推動。

????設(shè)計巧妙的城市具有高質(zhì)量的建筑、廣闊的公共空間、不同用途的靈活配置、世界一流的交通系統(tǒng)、干凈的空氣和水，這樣的城市真正是一個富裕的經(jīng)濟體與和諧社會的基礎(chǔ)。這些品質(zhì)似乎是一份長長的、甚至是烏托邦式的清單。但事實證明，只要在初期做出幾項至關(guān)重要的選擇，就能實現(xiàn)這些品質(zhì)。做不到這點，中國就將面對絕對黯淡的未來。

????這些關(guān)鍵選擇是什么？城市形態(tài)如何推動了農(nóng)業(yè)、水和能源？對包括中國在內(nèi)的世界各地的城市做個調(diào)查，就能找到明確的答案。

????讓我們從城市布局這一簡單問題開始講起。設(shè)想兩種對立的城市設(shè)計模型，兩種模型占地相同，容納的市民數(shù)量也相同。一種模型將各種用途彼此分割開來，某些街區(qū)用于住人，某些用于購物，另外一些用于商業(yè)。每種用途集中在“超級街區(qū)”之中，也就是我們今天在很多中國新社區(qū)中看到的長達半公里的建筑群。這些超級街區(qū)又與大量多車道的大馬路相連。

????不難想到，選擇這種布局，將造成一個依賴于汽車的經(jīng)濟體。人們必須遠距離購物、上班、看病、接送孩子上學(xué)。不太容易看到的是，由于缺乏小一些的輔路，即使是大馬路也會迅速變得擁堵。所有車輛都集中在主要道路上，結(jié)果就是導(dǎo)致交通癱瘓的擁堵。不久前中國的研究表明，與具備了通過性更強的交通網(wǎng)絡(luò)的多用途布局相比，這種超級街區(qū)式的分割式布局的交通能耗要高兩倍。

????不幸的是，這種模式會催生更多的相同的模式。不可避免的交通擁堵會推動人們修建更多的車道、更多的高速公路，等等。開發(fā)商從中獲得經(jīng)濟利益，中國一直以狹隘的經(jīng)濟指標(biāo)而不是更宏觀的宜居性標(biāo)準來考評各地的市長，這些都推動了這種模式的發(fā)展。這樣的循環(huán)造成了巨大的能源需求，占用了大量土地和開闊空間，就連城市周邊的農(nóng)耕地也被占用。

????另一種建筑格局是采取混合用途，圍繞著數(shù)量更多但小一些的街道，開發(fā)一個提供多種交通方式選擇的網(wǎng)絡(luò)，確保每個街區(qū)都有公園、娛樂設(shè)施、購物場所，等等。通過建設(shè)滿足日常生活的大部分需求的社區(qū)——全天開放并適用于各年齡段的人——就可以緩解交通，提高生活質(zhì)量。擁有小街道的小型街區(qū)讓步行、騎自行車和公共交通變得更加可行。

????因此，除了節(jié)省能源和土地，這種配置的一大好處是大大提高了宜居性。事實證明，人們喜歡擁有購物、上班、上學(xué)、看病、娛樂和居住的諸多功能一應(yīng)俱全的社區(qū)。此外，為所有市民而不只是有車一族提供出行方便對于生活質(zhì)量來說無疑也非常重要。目前，中國的汽車保有率不足5%，但大部分中國城市已經(jīng)遭受了嚴重的交通擁堵。不難看出，汽車繼續(xù)增加只會讓情況更加惡化。

????除了城市布局，我們還必須考慮交通問題。眼下，沒人對交通狀況滿意。有三個解決方案，概念都很簡單，成本也低，但有賴于巧妙的執(zhí)行。它們是：一流的公共交通系統(tǒng)，包括快速公交系統(tǒng)、步行和騎自行車。

????快速公交系統(tǒng)（BRT）是一種先進的工程設(shè)計，它具備地鐵的速度和載客量，但成本只有地鐵的5%到10%。這可具有重要意義：同樣的載重，成本卻低90%，這是一個可以改變城市面貌的重大變化。

????China’s future is, significantly, an urban future. By 2030, one billion Chinese will live in cities, and cities are the economic engine of the country. The form of these cities, then, will determine how China prospers. China’s energy patterns, water use and even agriculture will all be driven by choices made in urban form.

????Brilliantly designed cities, with high-quality buildings, generous public spaces, a lively mix of uses, world-class transportation, and clean air and water are truly the basis of a prosperous economy and a harmonious society. That seems like a long, even utopian, list. But it turns out that a few, crucially important choices, made early on, can deliver those qualities. Failing that task will leave China with decidedly worse prospects.

????What are those key choices? How can urban form drive agriculture, water, and energy? Surveying cities across the world, including in China, makes the answers clear.

????Begin the simple question of urban layout. Imagine two competing models of urban design, each housing the same number of citizens in the same area. One model isolates each use from the other, with housing in some neighborhoods, shopping in others, and business in still others. Each use is concentrated in “super-blocks,” the half-kilometer compounds that we see in many new developments in China. These super-blocks are linked with enormous, multi-lane boulevards.

????It doesn’t take much imagination to understand that this choice of layout creates a car-dependent economy. People have to cover long distances to shop, go to work, visit a clinic, and take the kids to school. What is less obvious is that even large boulevards become quickly congested due to the lack of smaller secondary roads. All traffic is concentrated on main road. Paralyzing traffic jams result. Recent studies in China show that this isolate layout with superblocks creates a trebling of transportation energy, compared to mixed uses with a more permeable transportation network.

????Unfortunately, this pattern incites more of the same. The inevitable traffic jams create calls for more lanes, more highways, and so forth. The economic gains made by developers and the fact that mayors in China have been judged by narrow economic indicators and not not broader measures of livability propels the process forward. And this cycle creates large energy demands, consumes large amounts of land and open space, and displaces the agricultural lands surrounding the city.

????The alternative architecture is to mix uses, develop a rich network of transportation options on more, but smaller, streets, and ensure that each neighborhood features parks, recreation, shopping, and the like. By creating neighborhoods that meet the majority of daily needs, and which are attractive for all ages, at all hours, it is possible to cut traffic and increase the quality of life. Smaller blocks with small streets make biking, walking, and public transportation more feasible.

????So, besides the energy and land savings, the big bonus to this kind of configuration is that it is much more livable. It turns out that people like neighborhoods with many different options – shopping, work, school, healthcare, recreation, and housing all intermingled. And, not surprisingly, providing mobility for all citizens, not just those with cars, is important to the quality of life. Fewer than 1 in 20 Chinese currently own a car, yet most Chinese cities already suffer terrible traffic jams. It’s simple math to see that more cars will only exacerbate the situation.

????After urban layout, one must consider transportation. No one is satisfied with the state of the field today. The three answers are simple in concept, low in cost, but require sophisticated execution. They are: First class public transit, including vus rapid transit, walking, and biking.

????Public transit cannot be an afterthought. It must be a core consideration of any Chinese city. To successfully compete against the car, public transit must be fast, clean, reliable, safe, and convenient. Metro lines are a great step in the right direction. They should be complemented with a rethink of buses—employing bus rapid transit.

????Bus rapid transit (BRT) is a sophisticated engineering approach that produces subway speeds and capacity at only five to 10 percent of the cost of a subway. That is a big deal: the same capacity with 90 percent cost reduction is an urban game changer.

????要了解它是怎么做到的，讓我們看看廣州新建的快速公交系統(tǒng)。該系統(tǒng)每天運送80萬乘客，比這個城市的任何一條地鐵線都多，但它只用了9個月就建成了?？焖俟幌到y(tǒng)如何實現(xiàn)這一成績？它一定要滿足數(shù)項要求：首先，公交車必須擁有中間車道的專用出入口。出入口專用可以避免公交車與汽車搶道，使用中間車道可以避免小汽車轉(zhuǎn)彎造成的延誤。公交車配備了響應(yīng)器，在接近紅綠燈的時候令綠燈亮起。單這兩項創(chuàng)新就讓公交車的行駛速度接近了地鐵。

????其次，公交車駛?cè)氲氖钦?guī)車站，而不是尋常的?？空?。它們有什么區(qū)別？人們要在進車站前而不是上車前付費。所以，公交車不必為了收費而等待。這種公交車是普通公交車的兩到三倍長，配有成排的車門，它們距地面的高度與站臺平齊，這一排門一打開，所有人都像坐地鐵那樣蜂擁上下車。

????還有另外數(shù)項巧妙的設(shè)計：電子售票系統(tǒng)、先進的控制和調(diào)度系統(tǒng)；與支線系統(tǒng)、自行車與步行線路之間的協(xié)調(diào)設(shè)計。實現(xiàn)所有這些并不昂貴，但是必須經(jīng)過精妙的安排。做對了，一個廉價、快速、高質(zhì)量的交通系統(tǒng)就展現(xiàn)在你面前。

????必須注意的是快速公交系統(tǒng)需要從一開始就進行智能設(shè)計，并且全程進行智能管理。快速公交系統(tǒng)絕不是地鐵的替代品，而是一個很好的補充。

????公共交通系統(tǒng)很了不起，但并非適合所有出行或所有人。另外兩種解決方案在中國和全世界都有源遠流長的歷史：騎自行車和步行。這些手段非常平凡，而且廉價、健康、安靜，沒有碳排放，可達性高，也讓社區(qū)變得更加宜居。這些都是極大的優(yōu)點。

????交通的鐵律是：只要建成，就有人來。洛杉磯建造了無盡長度的高速公路，造成了無盡擁堵。哥本哈根修建自行車道，即便那里的天氣很少有好的時候，但該市仍有40%的出行方式是騎自行車。中國需要重拾一些極好的舊習(xí)慣，在所有地方修建自行車道，這將在人們出行、空氣質(zhì)量、身體健康和生活品質(zhì)等方面產(chǎn)生巨大回報。短于4公里的路程對騎自行車來說最理想。使用新型的電動自行車可以輕松將這一里程翻番。8公里的行動半徑可以覆蓋方圓200平方公里的地區(qū)。

????但如果騎車有危險，人們也不會采納。騎自行車與汽車爭道絕不是件好玩的事，通常都很危險。騎自行車的人可以比任何一種其它的交通方式更有效地利用空間，但它畢竟還是需要空間。

????最終，我們說說最基礎(chǔ)的交通方式：步行。所有旅程都以步行開始，以步行結(jié)束，所以城市規(guī)劃者需要讓步行成為合理的選擇。方法很簡單，不過經(jīng)常被忽略：小型街區(qū)和小街道、樹陰、空間共用和漂亮的人行道。

????這三項策略——一流的公共交通系統(tǒng)、騎自行車和步行——都是汽車的高質(zhì)量替代方案。在中國，任何交通擁堵所浪費的時間，都應(yīng)該能讓各地的市長們相信，尋找汽車的替代方案有多么重要。但是，正如很多中國和國際城市的市長們所認識到的，這種方案還必須通過控制汽車來加以補充完善。根據(jù)簡單的經(jīng)濟學(xué)原理，如果什么東西定價過低，它就將被過度使用。街道和高速公路的使用價格為零造成了擁堵。這是非常簡單的道理。結(jié)果在中國的大部分地區(qū)也是顯然易見的。

????控制汽車的正確策略是什么？有很多種：倫敦和新加坡對在交通高峰時間進入城市商業(yè)區(qū)的汽車征收擁堵費；上海嚴格限制頒發(fā)新車牌的數(shù)量，令申領(lǐng)汽車牌照成本高昂；東京要求有意購車者證明自己擁有停車的地方；舊金山正試行在停車場車位將滿時提高停車費；哥本哈根在城市交通擁擠期的7/8時間內(nèi)，將通向城市的街道的紅綠燈全部變?yōu)榧t燈。

????中國城市的正確策略需要通過實驗確定，各地的策略也會各不相同。但沒有策略只會招至長期的交通擁堵。

????將這些問題捆綁在一起的，是一個核心的力量：中國為其城市融資的方式。中國的大部分稅收收入歸中央政府。各地市長需要為飲用水、污水、街道、公共建筑、地方管理、警察部門、建筑監(jiān)管單位等事物融資。為了籌集現(xiàn)金，他們不得不向開發(fā)商出售土地（從技術(shù)上說，是長期租賃）。

????這種交易正是今日開發(fā)面積超大、用途單一、易發(fā)生擁堵的社區(qū)的本質(zhì)所在。 對市長們而言，遠為簡單、高效的辦法是把一大塊土地（通常為0.5平方公里，即25公頃）賣給開發(fā)商，由開發(fā)商負責(zé)街區(qū)的全部規(guī)劃、基建和設(shè)計工作。開發(fā)商反過來可以快速行動，在建造十幾處同樣的單一用途建筑時避免了爭執(zhí)。不幸的是，造成市長與開發(fā)商短視的原因也毀掉了這座城市。

????實行替代方案時不我待。城市需要從地產(chǎn)稅上獲取運行所需的收入、從債券市場上來改善資本支出，所有這些需要做到透明和公開。此外還要采取更為先進的解決方案。中國的市長們應(yīng)該更好地利用污染收費，并對開發(fā)商收取費用，以應(yīng)對公共基礎(chǔ)設(shè)施方面的需求。這些舉措將創(chuàng)造穩(wěn)定的收入流，同時有助于讓環(huán)境變得更加健康。

????綜上所述，我們可以看到有4大好處：第一，城市變得更加宜居，街區(qū)富于活力，擁堵緩解，并擁有更好的交通替代方案。第二，交通能耗下降，最多達三分之二，相應(yīng)的空氣污染也會有所減輕。第三及第四，通過限制擴張，中國城市將減少對水的消費和對耕地的占用 。中國有一部分最高產(chǎn)的耕地位于城市周邊，如果用它們來蓋住宅樓，將會使缺水現(xiàn)象更加嚴重，農(nóng)民也要被迫遷移。

????中國在過去30年的發(fā)展無論從深度和廣度還是從它帶來的經(jīng)濟變革看都有如史詩一般?，F(xiàn)在，這一變革要進入下一個方向，這次中國必須重視生活質(zhì)量和環(huán)境保護。把城市建設(shè)好是實現(xiàn)這一步的唯一途徑。（財富中文網(wǎng)）

????譯者：天逸

????作者簡介：霍爾·哈維（Hal Harvey）是能源創(chuàng)新：政治與技術(shù)有限責(zé)任公司（Energy Innovation: Policy and Technology LLC）首席執(zhí)行官，保爾森中心（Paulson Institute）高級研究員。

????To see how this works, check out the new BRT in Guangzhou. It hauls 800,000 passengers per day, more than any metro line in the city—but it was built in only nine months. How does BRT achieve this? A half-dozen requirements must be met: First, the buses need exclusive access to the middle lanes. Exclusive to avoid traffic conflicts with cars, and the middle lanes to avoid delays caused by turning cars. The buses are equipped with transponders that turn lights green as they approach. These two innovations alone give them travel speeds close to metros.

????Then, buses roll into stations, not stops. The difference? People pay to get into a station, rather than to get into a bus. So the bus need not wait for the fare. The buses themselves are double or triple long, with a wall of doors, and they pull up to platforms level with the bus. The wall of doors opens, everyone piles off and on, just like a subway.

????Another dozen refinements await: electronic ticketing, sophisticated control systems and dispatch, coordination with feeder systems, bike and pedestrian links, and so forth. Putting this all together is not expensive, but requires great sophistication. When you get it right, a cheap, fast, high-quality transportation system emerges.

????It must be noted that BRT requires a commitment to smart design at the start, and smart management throughout. And BRT is not a replacement for metros, but a great supplement.

????Public transit is crucial, but is not the right thing for all trips or all people. The other two solutions have a deep history in China, and across the world: Biking and walking. These are mundane. They are also cheap, healthy, quiet, accessible to all, emit zero carbon, and help make neighborhoods more livable. That’s a pretty nice set of attributes.

????The iron rule of transportation is: If you build it, they will come. Los Angeles built endless highway miles, and has endless traffic jams. Copenhagen built bike paths, and even though the climate there is rarely lovely, has 40% of trips by bike. China needs to revert to some old, brilliant habits, and create bike lanes everywhere. The payback in mobility, clean air, health, and quality of life will be profound. Trips of under 4 kilometers are ideal for a bike. The new e-bikes can easily double that range. And an eight kilometer radius covers over 200 km-sq of ground.

????But if biking is dangerous, people will stop. Competing with cars on a bike is never fun, and is usually dangerous. Bicyclists use space more efficiently than any other mode of transportation, but they do require space.

????Finally comes the most basic mode of all: Walking. Every trip starts and ends with a walk, so city planners need to make that a reasonable choice. The formula is easy, if often neglected: Small blocks and small streets; shade; mixed uses; decent sidewalks.

????These three strategies—first class public transport, biking, and walking—together offer a high-quality alternative to the car. Any time spent in China’s traffic jams should convince mayors of just how important that is. But, as the mayors of many Chinese and international cities recognize, this needs to be complemented by car control. Simple economics argues that if you underprice something, it will be overused. Pricing streets and highways at zero creates congestion. That’s pretty simple. And that result is evident in most in China.

????What are the right strategies for car control? There are a dozen flavors: London and Singapore have congestion pricing, charging cars to come into downtown areas at busy times. Shanghai strictly limits the number of new license plates it issues, making it very costly to register a car. Tokyo requires prospective car buyers to prove they have a parking place. San Francisco is experimenting with raising parking prices whenever they start to fill up. And Copenhagen turns the lights on streets into the city red for 7/8 of the time when it gets crowded.

????The right strategy for China’s cities will be found by experimentation, and may differ from place to place. But having no strategy is a recipe for ever-longer traffic jams.

????There is one core force that ties all these issues together: The way China finances its cities. Most tax revenue in China goes to the central government. Mayors need funds for water, sewage, streets, civic buildings, and for running the place, with police, building inspectors, and so forth. To raise this cash, they are forced to sell land to developers (long-term leases, technically).

????And it is this transaction that is at the heart of today’s superblock, single-use, congestion-inducing development. For the mayors, it is far easier and expeditious to sell a large piece of land (typically a half-kilometer square, or 25 hectares) to a developer, and let the developer do all the planning, infrastructure, and design for that block. Developers, in turn, can move quickly and avoid hassles if they get to build the same structure, with a single use, in a dozen copies. Unfortunately, what makes short-term sense for the mayor and the developer fails the city.

????The alternative is time-tested: City revenues for operation need to come from property tax, and for capital improvements, from bond markets. And both systems need to be transparent and publically accessible. More cutting edge solutions should also be adopted. China’s mayors should make greater use of pollution charges and charge fees to developers to reflect demands on public infrastructure. These will help create stable revenue streams while contributing to a healthier environment.

????Wrap this all together, and four great benefits emerge: First, the cities are far more livable, with lively neighborhoods, less congestion, and better transportation alternatives. Second, energy use for transportation drops—by as much as two-thirds, and with it the attendant air pollution. Third and fourth, by containing sprawl, Chinese cities will use less water and consume less farmland. Some of the most productive farmlands in China lie outside the city boundaries: If these are turned into more housing compounds, they will exacerbate water shortages and displace farmers.

????China’s development over the last three decades has been heroic in scope and scale, and in the economic transformations it has brought. This transformation needs the next turn—which must be for quality of life and preservation of the environment. And getting the cities right is the only way to do that.