The Institutional Difference Between Chinese and Australian Planning Policies from the Perspective of Urban-Rural Integration, and What Can It Tell Us?
{"title":"The Institutional Difference Between Chinese and Australian Planning Policies from the Perspective of Urban-Rural Integration, and What Can It Tell Us?","authors":"Lianfeng Qiu","doi":"10.22217/upi.2018.487","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Responding to current impetus for urban-rural integration in China, planning has been regarded as an effective approach to achieve this goal, and advanced experiences from abroad are favoured among scholars. This paper establishes a conceptual model underpinned by institutional theory. By comparing China with Australia in terms of planning policies, the paper explores the main similitudes and distinctive divergences with respect to definitions of urban and rural areas, developments, local authority operation, planning system and financial support for infrastructure construction. The contribution of this paper is, first of all, to make up for vacancies in relevant domestic literature to a certain extent; secondly, to clarify the institutional differences in planning administration between China and Australia and even the Commonwealth countries, which can help us to avoid cognitive mistakes and deepen understanding of foreign construction achievements. Finally and more importantly, urban-rural equivalence doctrine demonstrated by this paper implies an optional path for China’s integrational urbanization. 关键词: 城乡融合;规划管理;制度性差异;认知误区;","PeriodicalId":67440,"journal":{"name":"国际城市规划","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-10-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"国际城市规划","FirstCategoryId":"1089","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.22217/upi.2018.487","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Responding to current impetus for urban-rural integration in China, planning has been regarded as an effective approach to achieve this goal, and advanced experiences from abroad are favoured among scholars. This paper establishes a conceptual model underpinned by institutional theory. By comparing China with Australia in terms of planning policies, the paper explores the main similitudes and distinctive divergences with respect to definitions of urban and rural areas, developments, local authority operation, planning system and financial support for infrastructure construction. The contribution of this paper is, first of all, to make up for vacancies in relevant domestic literature to a certain extent; secondly, to clarify the institutional differences in planning administration between China and Australia and even the Commonwealth countries, which can help us to avoid cognitive mistakes and deepen understanding of foreign construction achievements. Finally and more importantly, urban-rural equivalence doctrine demonstrated by this paper implies an optional path for China’s integrational urbanization. 关键词: 城乡融合;规划管理;制度性差异;认知误区;