大都市郊区不同类型乡村空间形态特征与居民感知差异

城市化进程的加快促使乡村成为资本青睐和占用的空间，并不断外化于村落空间形态等物质空间中。而乡村形态分化与居民感知差异微观透视了城乡关系的变化与村民生活方式的重塑，是村落规划、土地整治、农村居民点重构等的前提与基础。该研究基于空间句法模型，选取北京市半截河村和莲花池村为案例，探讨大都市郊区不同类型乡村空间形态与居民空间感知差异，识别乡村空间形态与感知差异的形成机制。研究发现：1）不同类型乡村空间形态存在较大差异，传统农业型乡村发展具有内聚性，村落空间形态同构性明显；休闲旅游型乡村发展外向性特征明显，村落空间形态与格局不断分化与重塑。2）不同类型使用者乡村空间感知分化显著，传统农业型乡村村民感知延续传统，生活空间感知频率远高于生产空间；休闲旅游型乡村村民对生产空间感知程度显著高于生活空间，外来群体意象图简单，空间元素多处出现断点。3）乡村空间形态和感知差异是多重因素相互制约的结果。最后，针对不同类型乡村空间形态差异及村民感知偏差，从完善内外交通网络、合理规划村落空间、维护乡村地方性以及分类引导资本投资四方面提出了政策建议，以期为大都市郊区农村居民点重构与村庄发展规划提供理论借鉴。

Spatial characteristics and residents' perception differences of different types of rural areas in suburbs of metropolis

The countryside has been constantly externalized in the material space, such as the village spatial form. The favored space can be occupied by the capital in the acceleration of the urbanization process in recent years. The rural form differentiation and residents ''perception difference can be expected to serve as the micro-perspective change of urban-rural relationship in the reshaping of villagers'' lifestyle. The premise and foundation can also be found in village planning, land consolidation, and rural residential area reconstruction. However, there were significant differences in the spatial patterns of different regions and types of rural areas. Taking the Banjiehe and Lianhuachi village in Beijing,China as the empirical objects, this study aims to explore the spatial morphological characteristics of the different types of rural areas in the metropolitan suburbs, as well as the residents'' spatial cognitive differences. The theoretical model of spatial syntax was also selected to clarify the formation mechanism of rural spatial morphology and cognitive differences from the perspectives of resources, economy, power, and culture. A theoretical basis was provided for the diversified use of the different types of rural space and village spatial planning during urbanization. The research results show that: 1) There were significant differences in the spatial forms of the different types of rural areas. Firstly, the traditional agricultural rural areas shared homogeneous landforms and relatively high residents'' awareness. By contrast, the single agricultural industry characteristics led to the relatively closed villages, with outstanding development cohesion characteristics. The spatial morphology presented the isomorphism consistent with the traditional agricultural villages. Secondly, the recognition of space users was continuously improved with the strong promotion of urbanization and rural leisure consumption. Although the low accessibility and cognitive level of villages were found in the leisure tourism-oriented villages, due to the terrain factors and transportation conditions. The prominent extroversion of villages was continuously differentiated to reshape the spatial form and pattern. 2) Different types of users were the significant differentiation in their cognition of rural space. Firstly, there were the differentiated cognitive elements of villagers, indicating the traditional cognition of agricultural rural villagers. The cognitive frequency of living space was much higher than that of production space. Leisure tourism rural villagers'' perception of production space was significantly higher than that of the living space. Secondly, the simple image of foreign groups shared many breakpoints in the spatial elements. The strong sense of "the other" demonstrated that less attention was paid to the high integration axis in the image of villagers. 3) Village spatial form and cognitive differences were the byproducts of multiple factors, such as the natural resources, government power, economic development, and social culture that restricted each other and gaming intertwined. Different factors also presented the different functions and cognitions of rural space form. Among them, the natural resources and social culture were constrained continuously, but there was a gradually weak influence and binding power. The economic development and government power were also mutant to accelerate the driving effect. The differences were observed in the spatial morphology and villagers'' cognitive biases in the different types of rural areas. The policy recommendations were also proposed from four aspects: the internal and external transportation networks, village space, rural locality, as well as the classification and guidance of capital investment.