上海与伦敦智慧城市建设路径比较研究  

A comparative study on smart city construction paths of London and Shanghai

作　　者：楚天骄[1] CHU Tianjiao(China Executive Leadership Academy,Shanghai 201204,China)

机构地区：[1]中国浦东干部学院城市现代化研究中心,上海201204

出　　处：《世界地理研究》2021年第6期1163-1174,共12页World Regional Studies

基　　金：中国浦东干部学院项目(CELAP2020-JYZ-04)。

摘　　要：十多年来,建设智慧城市已经成为一项全球性运动。与智慧城市建设的风起云涌不相匹配的是,智慧城市的概念始终模糊,至今尚未形成能够被普遍认可的定义,这一现象给研究者和政策制定者造成了困惑。本文对众多的智慧城市概念加以梳理,发现智慧城市这一概念正在从供给视角逐渐转向需求视角。应用了不同视角的概念,不同的城市在智慧城市建设过程中出现顺序推进和逆序规划这两种建设路径。前者的典型代表是2018年之前的上海,后者的代表性城市是伦敦。按照不同的路径进行建设,城市会具有不同的优势,对应地也会出现各自的劣势。建设智慧城市不存在完全一样的模式,城市应该根据自身基础选择适合自己的路径,并根据建设进度在适当的时候进行优化。In the past ten years, building smart cities has become a global movement. Unmatched with the upsurge of smart city construction, smart city has always been a vague concept and has not yet formed a universally accepted definition, which has also caused confusion among researchers and policy makers. This paper combs the existing concept of smart city, and holds that the concept of smart city is undergoing a process of evolution from the perspective of supply to the perspective of demand. Applying these two concepts of smart city from different perspectives, two construction paths, sequential promotion and reverse planning, are formed.Shanghai is the typical representative of the former construction path, while London is the practitioner of the latter. In the process of promoting the construction of smart cities along different paths, the two cities have formed their respective advantages and disadvantages. A comparative study of the construction paths of Shanghai and London shows that there is no single model for the construction of smart cities. The ideal construction paths of smart cities should be able to integrate the advantages of the two paths and adjust them timely according to different stages of development.

关 键 词：智慧城市 数字化 城市治理 上海 伦敦 

分 类 号：F49[经济管理—产业经济] F299.27F49.61F299.561