住房政策的外文翻譯--住房政策是福利和經(jīng)濟(jì)發(fā)展的鏈接

1、<p>　　住房政策是福利和經(jīng)濟(jì)發(fā)展的鏈接</p><p>　　近十幾年來(lái)，住房增多現(xiàn)象在歐洲許多城市已成為最明顯的變化。新房屋和新的居民區(qū)在城市景觀中占主要地位。房屋數(shù)量的增加反映了經(jīng)濟(jì)正在快速增長(zhǎng)，人們的富裕程度正在穩(wěn)定上升，同時(shí)這種現(xiàn)象也被成為所謂的第二人口統(tǒng)計(jì)學(xué)的變革。這場(chǎng)變革導(dǎo)致了房屋數(shù)量正以出人意料的速度增長(zhǎng)。就我們看來(lái)，這種增長(zhǎng)客觀地反映了人們對(duì)房屋的迫切需求。目前，許多國(guó)家，尤其是西歐的

2、部分國(guó)家，人口結(jié)構(gòu)變化的改變比任何其他地方都來(lái)得早。對(duì)于政策，人們有很多不同的反映，這主要取決于各個(gè)國(guó)家的文化，政策傳統(tǒng)以及各國(guó)經(jīng)濟(jì)的多樣發(fā)展。但是Feddes 和Dieleman（1996）研究認(rèn)為：不管?chē)?guó)家規(guī)定采用何種不同的福利研究模型，目前房屋已成為重要政策中的主要成分。西歐目前60%的房屋建于1945年以后，對(duì)于這些房屋的存在形式來(lái)說(shuō)，大多數(shù)住房屬于補(bǔ)貼性住房。在各國(guó)政治議程上，房地產(chǎn)開(kāi)發(fā)項(xiàng)目和他們高度分化的事實(shí)需要投入相當(dāng)大的

3、金錢(qián)。</p><p>　　起初，所有的努力旨在建立更多的住房來(lái)滿(mǎn)足住房短缺問(wèn)題。但是在1970年代早起，由于此時(shí)經(jīng)濟(jì)全球化進(jìn)入低迷時(shí)期，對(duì)房屋補(bǔ)助的升級(jí)已成為西歐大陸的負(fù)擔(dān)。他們嘗試采用金融資源盡可能有效控制并保持穩(wěn)定的借貸，以促使補(bǔ)助系統(tǒng)的改善。這種從一般補(bǔ)貼的強(qiáng)性轉(zhuǎn)變意味著保證房?jī)r(jià)的低廉。相反，房屋補(bǔ)貼使那些承受不起上漲房?jī)r(jià)的人能買(mǎi)到房子。在很多國(guó)家，這些補(bǔ)助通常只給予租房的人們，而其他地方，該項(xiàng)補(bǔ)助還涉及

4、到低收入家庭。政策的改變?cè)试S房?jī)r(jià)增長(zhǎng)到市場(chǎng)允許的水平。同時(shí)，嘗試在城鎮(zhèn)新建區(qū)內(nèi)改善房屋屋內(nèi)建設(shè)質(zhì)量和屋外設(shè)計(jì)形式。由于房屋數(shù)量的增長(zhǎng)正面臨著房屋消費(fèi)的通脹，許多人改變了他們對(duì)住房的渴望程度，這現(xiàn)象在一些國(guó)家比較低，較為顯著的主要有荷蘭，瑞士和德國(guó)。其中，法國(guó)和英國(guó)是第一個(gè)著手檢修住房系統(tǒng)問(wèn)題了國(guó)家。最終，連瑞典和荷蘭這兩個(gè)對(duì)福利政策最堅(jiān)定的國(guó)家也進(jìn)行檢修他們的住房系統(tǒng)?，F(xiàn)在來(lái)看，自1945年以來(lái)，這兩個(gè)州的房地產(chǎn)動(dòng)向更是以市場(chǎng)為導(dǎo)向了。

5、</p><p>　　盡管在過(guò)去的50年里，實(shí)施定量推力住房政策，歐洲政府仍不斷尋求改善住房質(zhì)量,無(wú)論是為了狹義定義目標(biāo)群體還是廣大人口。住房政策和經(jīng)濟(jì)循環(huán)的任何聯(lián)系都在住房項(xiàng)目中得以改善，以跟上國(guó)民經(jīng)濟(jì)條件的變化。很顯然，對(duì)改革后的住房的推動(dòng)力主要來(lái)源于關(guān)于國(guó)家預(yù)算的政策決定。不應(yīng)該感到奇怪,在過(guò)去的十年中,住房政策就有一次被調(diào)諧。于是在歐洲貨幣整合情況下，各州不得不采取積極的應(yīng)對(duì)措施，此次事件給各國(guó)國(guó)家債務(wù)帶

6、來(lái)了太多的政治壓力。</p><p>　　然而在決策實(shí)施低水平狀況下，還有另一個(gè)經(jīng)濟(jì)方面的住房。有明顯跡象表明，當(dāng)?shù)睾偷胤秸畬⒆》孔鳛樗麄冊(cè)诮?jīng)濟(jì)增長(zhǎng)中杠桿的現(xiàn)象越來(lái)越突出。這是一個(gè)反應(yīng)在世界經(jīng)濟(jì)中,發(fā)生了根本性的變化的現(xiàn)象。各種機(jī)構(gòu)也直接或間接地在發(fā)生著變化——從一個(gè)突出本地建設(shè)到成為一個(gè)全球機(jī)械。則經(jīng)濟(jì)的新形勢(shì)需根據(jù)參與者角色的不斷變化，對(duì)房屋的角色進(jìn)行重新定義。就個(gè)人而言，每個(gè)房子仍為居住者提供最基本的功能

7、，如：提供住所，保證隱私，工作，基本的社會(huì)交流以及其他一系列設(shè)施和服務(wù)。但作為一個(gè)整體，住房正被迅速地改造成競(jìng)爭(zhēng)優(yōu)勢(shì)中最重要的組成部分。</p><p>　　縱觀整個(gè)轉(zhuǎn)變過(guò)程，經(jīng)濟(jì)中的管理環(huán)境似乎是用另一種方法進(jìn)行改變的：私人角色和公共部門(mén)實(shí)際上似是而非的。就其位置決定而言,地方政府準(zhǔn)備好制備的基礎(chǔ)設(shè)施和發(fā)展一堆商業(yè)地產(chǎn),以期望此后一些公司最終會(huì)選擇在此建立場(chǎng)所。與此同時(shí),企業(yè)家大力投資并積極進(jìn)行搜尋合適的營(yíng)地。

8、但是因?yàn)楹芏嗟胤秸疄楫?dāng)?shù)氐陌l(fā)展積極參與競(jìng)爭(zhēng),這使得有些公司在選擇營(yíng)地上處于一種被動(dòng)的劣勢(shì)。他們標(biāo)榜他們的意圖去安置,列出他們的要求,并等待投標(biāo)地方政府的同意。對(duì)于他們而言,地方政府很想認(rèn)識(shí)這種挑戰(zhàn)提供的所有獎(jiǎng)勵(lì)。此類(lèi)激勵(lì)方法涵蓋范圍很廣，而且也越變?cè)蕉?，因?yàn)榇蠹叶剂私獾疆?dāng)?shù)氐氖找媾c產(chǎn)出是直接相關(guān)的。一個(gè)典型的例子,我們放眼看大西洋彼岸,一片繁華和爭(zhēng)先，但歐洲就緊隨其后，緊緊地跟著這一趨勢(shì)的發(fā)展。</p><p>

9、;　　經(jīng)濟(jì)地理學(xué)中將當(dāng)?shù)刈鳛樯a(chǎn)的環(huán)境，包括影響公司功能的所有外部環(huán)境。其中的一些環(huán)境緊緊地跟隨它自身的生產(chǎn)過(guò)程，根據(jù)決定收益的多少來(lái)給予一定的投入。在這個(gè)新的服務(wù)經(jīng)濟(jì)全球化的時(shí)代，這樣的輸入正被廣泛使用：人力資本是地方性的,而其他的投入可以便宜地移動(dòng)到其他任何地點(diǎn)。</p><p>　　目前，大多數(shù)城市提供廣泛的房屋，注重房子的規(guī)模、價(jià)格、類(lèi)型、和周?chē)h(huán)境舒適優(yōu)雅。對(duì)于消費(fèi)者來(lái)說(shuō)，房屋不僅僅是避風(fēng)港，同時(shí)它也給

10、使用者提供了一個(gè)機(jī)會(huì)——培養(yǎng)所需的生活方式。它的位置決定了工作機(jī)會(huì)和提供服務(wù)和設(shè)施的渠道。當(dāng)人們選擇居住地點(diǎn)時(shí)，許多人對(duì)居住環(huán)境的物理和社會(huì)性很敏感。鄰居能影響我們的生活方式和居民的社會(huì)地位。在社會(huì)交往中，鄰居就如框架一樣重要，一些人就更喜歡混合社區(qū)，而其他人就有自我保護(hù)意識(shí)，喜歡和自己的同類(lèi)一起生活。隨著城市人口多樣化地增長(zhǎng)，許多人開(kāi)始尋求自我保護(hù)，通過(guò)從緊密結(jié)合的隱私社區(qū)退出和斷絕與其他社會(huì)成員來(lái)往的方式來(lái)避免沖突狀況。從中，我們可

11、以看出，住宅程度的隔離制度反映了許多社會(huì)特征以及個(gè)人需求特性。</p><p>　　特別突出的住房問(wèn)題就是其經(jīng)濟(jì)價(jià)值。家庭代表一個(gè)巨大的股本。通過(guò)購(gòu)買(mǎi)和租賃手段對(duì)房屋進(jìn)行投資，需要很大份額的居民消費(fèi)。住房包括許多其他實(shí)質(zhì)性的成本，創(chuàng)造巨大的經(jīng)濟(jì)乘數(shù): 保養(yǎng)、稅收、公用事業(yè)、家具和許多其他費(fèi)用。投資建設(shè)新住房包括大量不同的資源。住房往往是一種公共預(yù)算中重要的事項(xiàng)，其中主要的公共投資是用來(lái)創(chuàng)造、維護(hù)和服務(wù)居民區(qū)的。因

12、為有大量的直接和間接投資。據(jù)相關(guān)資料顯示，住宅結(jié)構(gòu)曾是凱恩斯等經(jīng)濟(jì)學(xué)家為控制經(jīng)濟(jì)而干預(yù)的區(qū)域。</p><p>　　在市場(chǎng)交易上，房?jī)r(jià)主要取決于它的質(zhì)量。因此,富裕的人們往往集中在最好的住宅區(qū)，好的住宅吸引高收入決策者及專(zhuān)業(yè)人士。正是這些團(tuán)體，為當(dāng)?shù)亟?jīng)濟(jì)的發(fā)展打下了堅(jiān)實(shí)的基礎(chǔ)。當(dāng)他們到達(dá)某些特殊的地方,被當(dāng)?shù)厥孢m的居住環(huán)境所吸引時(shí)，企業(yè)就會(huì)緊跟其后面，盡量滿(mǎn)足他們的需要。由于公司的人力資本是主要的資源,這使得現(xiàn)代

13、商業(yè)的居住環(huán)境轉(zhuǎn)變成一個(gè)有關(guān)經(jīng)濟(jì)區(qū)位因素的問(wèn)題。確切地說(shuō)，當(dāng)廠商移動(dòng)時(shí)，這就對(duì)居民偏好產(chǎn)生一定影響。這是因?yàn)榧夹g(shù)工人和專(zhuān)業(yè)人員尋求減少上班的時(shí)間,公司位置的優(yōu)勢(shì)會(huì)吸引和保留高素質(zhì)員工隊(duì)伍。</p><p>　　為了利用有限的資源，住房建設(shè)的政策正努力地與其他領(lǐng)域的政策競(jìng)爭(zhēng)著，同時(shí)房屋專(zhuān)員經(jīng)常被要求證明對(duì)房地產(chǎn)投資的益處。目前,地方政府似乎正全神貫注于任務(wù)振興和重組當(dāng)?shù)亟?jīng)濟(jì)上，對(duì)于公共產(chǎn)品的消費(fèi)和投資，他們沒(méi)有什么

14、興趣。相反,他們覺(jué)得確保市收入應(yīng)先于開(kāi)支。然而,通過(guò)擴(kuò)展上述的爭(zhēng)論——促進(jìn)中小企業(yè)的股權(quán)以刺激當(dāng)?shù)氐慕?jīng)濟(jì)—看起來(lái)這筆錢(qián)是花在住房投資上了,甚至社會(huì)住房也會(huì)產(chǎn)生強(qiáng)大的經(jīng)濟(jì)效益。</p><p>　　舊的城市區(qū)域成功適應(yīng)新經(jīng)濟(jì)這個(gè)現(xiàn)實(shí)似乎由兩個(gè)世界組成。它們是工作場(chǎng)所和富裕的新運(yùn)動(dòng)場(chǎng)，是生活的炫耀性消費(fèi)。與此同時(shí),這些地方的特點(diǎn)是腐朽的社區(qū)、濃度的弱勢(shì)民族、無(wú)家可歸的人在街道上行走等等。從福利的意識(shí)形態(tài)上說(shuō)，對(duì)比于過(guò)

15、去孕育了大型社會(huì)住房項(xiàng)目，共享經(jīng)濟(jì)轉(zhuǎn)型的效益，我們認(rèn)為福利再分配的理想輸給了自由觀念。</p><p>　　然而,沒(méi)有特別的需要來(lái)恢復(fù)過(guò)去社區(qū)住宅這個(gè)項(xiàng)目。其他一些不那么雄心勃勃的解決方案,可在一個(gè)區(qū)域內(nèi)減少社會(huì)不平等的事件。但是這些設(shè)計(jì)必須考慮燃料投資。良好的居住環(huán)境吸引著人們，才能通過(guò)私人投資方式獲得及時(shí)的投資資金,相反的，住房條件差是一個(gè)社會(huì)排斥和沖突強(qiáng)烈的標(biāo)志。當(dāng)他們傳送清晰的信息時(shí)，他們必須避免這些：在

16、這里，不是新投資就一定安全。當(dāng)用一個(gè)式子計(jì)算出一個(gè)城市的成功時(shí)，房屋建設(shè)不應(yīng)該是福利與經(jīng)濟(jì)發(fā)展中缺失的環(huán)節(jié)。</p><p><b>　　外文原文（復(fù)印件）</b></p><p>　　Housing policy – the link between welfare and economic development</p><p>　　The

17、 expansion of the housing stock has been one of the most visible changes in European cities in recent decades; new homes and new residential areas dominate many of the urban landscapes. The increase in the number of home

18、s reflects the development of the economy and the steadily rising level of affluence, as well as the so-called second demographic transition that has resulted in an unprecedented growth of the number of households. This

19、increase readily translated into demand for housing. In s</p><p>　　Initially, all efforts were aimed at building more dwellings in response to the smoldering issue of the housing shortage. But when the globa

20、l economy went into recession in the early 1970s, the escalating housing subsidies became a bone of contention throughout Northwestern Europe. Attempts to keep the state budgets under control by using the financial resou

21、rces as efficiently as possible led to the overhaul of the subsidy systems. The emphasis shifted away from general construction subsidies th</p><p>　　In spite of the quantitative thrust of housing policies d

22、uring the past fiftyyears, European governments have continuously sought to improve housing quality, either for narrowly defined target groups or for the population at large. Any links between housing policies and econom

23、ic cycles took the form of adjustments made in the housing programs to keep up with changes in national economic conditions. Obviously, the impetus for adjusting the housing policies came from policy decisions concerning

24、 th</p><p>　　Yet, at lower levels of policy-making, there is another economic dimension of housing. There are clear signs that local and regional governments turn increasingly to housing as leverage in their

25、 competition for economic growth. This is a response to fundamental changes in the world economy. Each firm has been changed – directly or indirectly – from a predominantly local establishment into a cog in the global ma

26、chinery. The new economy is redefining the role of housing. Individually, each house s</p><p>　　The regulatory environment of the economy seems to be changing in another way too: the roles of the private and

27、 the public sectors are shifting. With respect to location decisions, local governments used to prepare infrastructure and develop a stock of business estates in the expectation that some firms would eventually choose to

28、 establish premises there. At the same time, entrepreneurs invested heavily in scouting for an appropriate site. But because so many local governments have become active</p><p>　　Economic geography treats lo

29、cations as production environments, comprising all the external conditions that affect the functioning of a firm. Some of these are closely tied to the production process itself, offering the inputs that determine profit

30、ability. In the new global service economy, such inputs are widely available: human capital can be created locally, while other inputs can be moved cheaply to any site.</p><p>　　Most cities offer a wide rang

31、e of housing with respect to size, price, type, and amenities. Housing is more than shelter. It also provides the occupants with an opportunity to cultivate a desired lifestyle. Its location determines opportunities for

32、work and access to services and facilities. Many people are sensitive to the physical and social characteristics of a residential environment when they choose a place to live. The neighborhood influences the quality of l

33、ife and the social status of th</p><p>　　A particularly salient aspect of housing is its economic value. Homes represent a huge capital stock. Investment in housing – through purchase or rent – accounts for

34、a large share of private consumption. Housing involves many other substantial costs, creating a large economic multiplier: upkeep, taxes, utilities, furnishings, and numerous other expenses. Investment in the constructio

35、n of new housing involves huge sums from various sources. Housing tends to be a major item on the public budget, t</p><p>　　In a market constellation, the price of housing is largely determined by its qualit

36、y. Accordingly, affluent people tend to concentrate in the best residential areas. Good housing attracts high-income decision-makers and professionals. And it is precisely these groups that now oil the wheels of the loca

37、l economy. When they move to particular places, attracted by the homes and high-amenity residential environments, businesses follow close behind. As human capital is a major resource for modern bus</p><p>　　

38、Where housing competes with other policy fields for limited resources, housing officials are often called upon to demonstrate the benefits of investment in housing. At present, local authorities seem to be preoccupied wi

39、th the task of revitalizing and restructuring the local economy. They have less interest in the provision of public goods and investments that serve consumption; instead, they feel that ensuring municipal revenues has to

40、 take precedence over spending. Yet, by extension of the arg</p><p>　　The old urban regions that have adapted themselves successfully to new economic realities seem to consist of two worlds. They are the wor

41、kplaces and the playgrounds of the newly affluent, with their lifestyles of conspicuous consumption. At the same time, these places are characterized by decaying neighborhoods, concentrations of disadvantaged ethnic grou

42、ps, and homeless people on the streets. In terms of the ideology of the welfare state that spawned the large social housing programs of the pas</p><p>　　Yet, there is no particular need to reinstate the soci

43、al housing programs of the past. Other, less ambitious solutions can diminish social inequality in an area. But these must be designed to fuel the flow of investment. Good housing in attractive neighborhoods can prompt i

44、nvestment by the private sector. Poor housing conditions, in contrast, are a strong indicator of social exclusion and of conflict. They must be avoided, as they transmit one clear message: these are not the places where