论文部分内容阅读
On June 14， 2016， the Chinese Academy of Sciences （CAS） issued a report on livability of Chinese cities， ranking a number of livable cities based on a survey. Zhang Wenzhong， researcher at the Geography Institute of CAS， led the research. In 40 selected cities， Zhang and his team handed out 12，000 questionnaires including 29 assessment indicators in six categories， namely city safety， public service facilities， natural environment， cultural environment， transportation， and air quality.
Qingdao First， Beijing Last
The survey showed Qingdao as the most livable city in the country out of the 40. Rounding out the top five were Kunming， Sanya， Dalian， and Weihai.
Qingdao tops the livability index list thanks to outstanding performance in all six areas. Kunming’s ranking benefitted greatly from its pleasant natural environment and distinctive cultural environment. Sanya won on its air quality and Dalian performed best in city safety and natural environment. Weihai， meanwhile， cracked the top five due to its natural and cultural environment.
On the other end， Beijing ranked dead last. The other four least livable cities were Nanchang， Taiyuan， Harbin， and Guangzhou.
The study also showed that the livable index of the 40 surveyed cities was generally low and only 17 scored above 60. The average score was 59.92， lower than basic resident satisfaction of 60. The most common problems were safety， air quality and transportation. The average score for city safety was only 55.76， with transporta- tion safety the lowest. Most were plagued by haze， with air quality scores averaging 58.23. Transportation convenience also scored only 58.59 due to parking problems and traffic jams.
In addition， different demographics showed remarkably different opinions on the same cities. Respondents with household income of 5，000 yuan or below as well as 20，000 yuan or above were more unsatisfied with their cities’ livability. Those in the middle tended to be more satisfied.
“Those at the lowest income levels do not even have a place to live in the city，” declares Zhao Hong， vice president of Beijing Academy of Social Sciences. “How can they consider it livable？” According to Zhao， about 250 million farmers reside in cities but cannot enjoy the public benefits of cities， and have strong feelings about the situation.
As for those in the middle， if they can secure a home， they are content with the status quo， while the high-income group has greater expectations for the city’s livability.
Air Pollution Hurting Beijing
The reason for Beijing’s position at the bottom of the list is its pollution， inconvenient transportation and unpleasant natural environment.
“Beijing’s weaknesses are very obvious： pollution and transportation，” notes Zhang. Beijing leads other cities in terms of safety， public services， and cultural environment. But its natural environment and transportation only scored 45.5 and 51.9， respectively.
Zhang and his team conducted research on Beijing’s livability in 2005， 2009， 2013 and 2015 successively. Their work shows that in the six categories， Beijing only saw air quality deteriorate. Also， compared to other cities surveyed， Beijing’s air quality got the lowest mark， 12.71 points lower than the average.
However， the report also emphasized that despite its subpar air quality， Beijing’s livability has been improving. Compared with its score in 2005， the city’s safety has increased by 150 percent， and cultural environment and transportation by 63.3 and 61.6 percent respectively. And its natural environment and public services are up of 31.13 and 20.2 percent respectively.
Zhao Hong believes Beijing first needs to improve its transportation system and make rail transit the primary facilitator for over 80 percent of total traffic. The hope is that cars will be used less. In addition， Beijing needs to improve its energy structure， industrial structure and lifestyle services to enhance the environment bearing capacity of the Beijing-Tianjin-Hebei region.
Qingdao First， Beijing Last
The survey showed Qingdao as the most livable city in the country out of the 40. Rounding out the top five were Kunming， Sanya， Dalian， and Weihai.
Qingdao tops the livability index list thanks to outstanding performance in all six areas. Kunming’s ranking benefitted greatly from its pleasant natural environment and distinctive cultural environment. Sanya won on its air quality and Dalian performed best in city safety and natural environment. Weihai， meanwhile， cracked the top five due to its natural and cultural environment.
On the other end， Beijing ranked dead last. The other four least livable cities were Nanchang， Taiyuan， Harbin， and Guangzhou.
The study also showed that the livable index of the 40 surveyed cities was generally low and only 17 scored above 60. The average score was 59.92， lower than basic resident satisfaction of 60. The most common problems were safety， air quality and transportation. The average score for city safety was only 55.76， with transporta- tion safety the lowest. Most were plagued by haze， with air quality scores averaging 58.23. Transportation convenience also scored only 58.59 due to parking problems and traffic jams.
In addition， different demographics showed remarkably different opinions on the same cities. Respondents with household income of 5，000 yuan or below as well as 20，000 yuan or above were more unsatisfied with their cities’ livability. Those in the middle tended to be more satisfied.
“Those at the lowest income levels do not even have a place to live in the city，” declares Zhao Hong， vice president of Beijing Academy of Social Sciences. “How can they consider it livable？” According to Zhao， about 250 million farmers reside in cities but cannot enjoy the public benefits of cities， and have strong feelings about the situation.
As for those in the middle， if they can secure a home， they are content with the status quo， while the high-income group has greater expectations for the city’s livability.
Air Pollution Hurting Beijing
The reason for Beijing’s position at the bottom of the list is its pollution， inconvenient transportation and unpleasant natural environment.
“Beijing’s weaknesses are very obvious： pollution and transportation，” notes Zhang. Beijing leads other cities in terms of safety， public services， and cultural environment. But its natural environment and transportation only scored 45.5 and 51.9， respectively.
Zhang and his team conducted research on Beijing’s livability in 2005， 2009， 2013 and 2015 successively. Their work shows that in the six categories， Beijing only saw air quality deteriorate. Also， compared to other cities surveyed， Beijing’s air quality got the lowest mark， 12.71 points lower than the average.
However， the report also emphasized that despite its subpar air quality， Beijing’s livability has been improving. Compared with its score in 2005， the city’s safety has increased by 150 percent， and cultural environment and transportation by 63.3 and 61.6 percent respectively. And its natural environment and public services are up of 31.13 and 20.2 percent respectively.
Zhao Hong believes Beijing first needs to improve its transportation system and make rail transit the primary facilitator for over 80 percent of total traffic. The hope is that cars will be used less. In addition， Beijing needs to improve its energy structure， industrial structure and lifestyle services to enhance the environment bearing capacity of the Beijing-Tianjin-Hebei region.