学科树视角下地理学和建筑学人居环境研究比较

本文从学科树视角比较分析地理学和建筑学的人居环境研究进展。首先,梳理研究脉络,指出两个学科具有相同的“树根”（即五大系统和五大层次）、“树干”（即九大主题和八大尺度）和“树枝”（即33个研究领域）,以及相异的“树叶”（即各领域数量迥异的研究成果）。其次,比较研究成果特点,发现两个学科成果差异明显,表现为在适宜性等6个二级主题上,地理学成果较多,建筑学成果较少;在规划等6个二级主题和建筑尺度上,建筑学成果较多,地理学成果较少;在空间格局等12个二级主题和城市等6个尺度上,两个学科成果均较多,但侧重点不同;在行为二级主题和全球尺度上,两个学科成果均较少,但侧重点不同。最后,剖析学科成果差异的生成逻辑,并展望未来进路。学科成果差异的逻辑起点是学科门类差异,逻辑链条是“学科门类—学科特性—研究主体—研究偏好—研究范式—研究成果”的差异传导机制,其中研究范式差异是链条中的重要环节。未来人居环境研究应促进框架延伸化、主题展拓化、尺度统筹化、数据多源化、方法混合化等范式提升,同时回应全球化、美好人居、突发事件、跨学科等现实需求。

Comparison of human settlement research in geography and architecture from the perspective of a theory tree

The progress of human settlement research in geography and architecture is reviewed from the perspective of a theory tree. First, an exploration of the research skeleton indicates that the two disciplines have the same tree roots, that is, nine research subjects and eight research scales; the same tree trunks, that is, nine research subjects and eight research scales; and the same tree branches, that is, 33 research fields; however, they have different tree leaves, in other words, there are different quantities of research achievements in each research field. Second, a comparison of the characteristics of the research achievements indicates that the research achievements in the two disciplines differ significantly. For six secondary subjects (e.g., suitability), there are abundant research achievements in geography, but few in architecture. For six secondary subjects (e.g., planning) and the architectural scale, there are abundant research achievements in architecture, but few in geography. For twelve secondary subjects (e.g., spatial pattern) and six scales (e.g., city), in both disciplines, there are abundant research achievements, but the focus points of their research achievements differ. For the behavior of the secondary subject and global scale, in both disciplines, there are few research achievements, but the focus points of their research achievements differ. Finally, the generative logic of the difference in achievements between the two disciplines is analyzed, and future interdisciplinary research pathways are proposed. The logical starting point for different achievements is due to different discipline categories. The logical chain of the difference in achievements is the transmission mechanism of "discipline categories-discipline characteristics-researchers-research preferences-research paradigms-research achievements". Among them, the difference between research paradigms is an important link in the chain. In the future, human settlement research paradigms should be improved, including extending the research framework, developing research subjects, planning research scales, applying multisource data, and using mixed research methods. Moreover, there should be a response to the needs of real-world development in terms of globalization, beautiful human settlements, emergencies, and interdisciplinary cooperation.