网络信息空间的城市地理学研究：综述与展望

doi:10.11867/j.issn.1001-8166.2002.06.0855

20世纪90年代，互联网飞速发展，不仅深刻地影响了我们的社会系统和经济结构，同时也重构了全球城市的物理和虚拟空间结构形式。近几年，在西方发达国家，网络信息空间的相关研究已经成为多学科研究的热点，有关城市网络信息空间的地理学研究也不断涌现。从技术与经济的角度入手，在已有文献资料基础上，对西方地理学界关于网络信息空间与城市发展的研究进展进行了评述。首先界定网络信息空间的概念及其相对于物理空间的各种特征，然后总结城市学者研究网络信息空间的几种理论方法，并从三个空间层次分别评述现有的实证研究成果。在此基础上，对网络信息空间的测量方法和关于城市地理学的研究内容进行了进一步展望。

关键词: 网络信息空间, 互联网, 城市地理学

Advanced information and telecommunication technology has brought human being into a new information age, resulting in the emerging of an informational, global, and networked society. In the 1990s, the rapid growth of the Internet has not only had strong impacts on the social and economical fields, but also restructured the organizations of global physical and virtual spaces. Despite the global changing of cities is obvious, our understanding of the urban dimensions of these technological systems is still poor. In recent years, the academic research on cyberspace has been becoming popular in many fields such as urban geography in the western countries. In technical and economic perspectives, this paper seeks to review the literature and give some consideration to the research of urban cyberspace.
Firstly, it defines the concept of cyberspace and summarizes the principal characteristics of cyberspace in comparison with physical space. Cyberspace is defined as a computer-generated landscape, i.e. the virtual space of a global computer network, linking all people, computers, and sources of various information in the world through which one could navigate. In fact, cyberspace is a metaphor used to understand computer networks. The Internet is a multi-layered organization, so cyberspace is layered in a physical, a network and an application layer as well as a layer of knowledge and action. Each layer displays its own type of spatial dependence. To a large extent cyberspace is embedded in, and often intertwines with the physical space and place, but some distinctions do exist between them. The most profound differences between the “two spaces” are the speed and contents of communications. Despite the “instantaneity” of communications, cyberspace is far from frictionless.
In recent years, there are four dominant theoretical perspectives to city—telecommunication relations: technological determinism, the intertwined approaches of futurism and utopianism, critical urban political economy, and the social construction of technology (SCOT) approach. These approaches suggest very different relationships between cities, the urban-rural interfaces and telecommunication. 
Technological determinism is based on the liner notion that innovation leads to new technologies which are then applied and used on the urban scene. Futurists and utopianists generally take a positive, liner view in forecasting the social and political implications of these future shifts. While both technological determinism and various strands of futurology suggest a functional relationship between telematics technologies and their urban “impacts”, the political economy approach focuses on cumulative causation in explaining uneven social and spatial development within and between cities. Here, the fundamental casual link goes from capitalist political, economic and social relations through the design and applications of telematics technology to explanations of core-periphery patterns of contemporary urban and regional development. As an alternative to the macro perspective taken by radical political economists, SCOT approaches maintains that the use and application of various infostructures are developed incrementally and shaped by organizations and individuals through processes of social and political institutionalization.
On the other hand, urban studies also have provided some empirical evidence linking cyberspace and cities on three spatial scales: global, national, and city-level scales. Castells' term, the space of flows, best captures the new spatial form, “the material organization of time-sharing social practices that work through flows”. This theory is particularly useful to understand the economic geography of the Internet at the global scale, especially related to the concept of world cities or global cities. Universally it is evident that the existing urban hierarchy centered on “global cities” such as New York, London and Tokyo, is playing an important role in Internet content production. At the same time, new technologies cause new “disturbances” that can result in the emergence of new clusters so-called “network cities”.
On national level, all existing case studies focus on US and European countries. Using Internet domain name or IP address spatial mapping, some scholars describe the relative magnitude and density of urban Internet clusters in US, Germany, UK and Norway. On the other hand, some studies attempt to measure Internet backbone structure and performance. Network analysis techniques are applied to evaluate Internet connectivity, revealing large differences in levels of accessibility of cities and regions.
Research on spatial organization of cyberspace in metropolitan areas is scarce. Some scholars among them conclude that domain names has been significantly concentrating on the central business districts of cities, and more and more evidences show that the existing industrial structure of a region plays an important part in supporting the development of commercial Internet content production in US. In recent years, there are also some scholars who begin to care about the 'urban' design and planning of cyberspace, and striding forward to cyber-cities planning.
Finally, on the basis of the above reviews, the prospects of measurements and contents of cyberspace for further research are highlighted. With the further development in information and telecommunication technology, the second stage of “geographic exploration” is emerging.

Key words: Cyberspace, Internet, Urban geography.

中图分类号:

［1］ Toffler A. The Third Wave［M］. New York: William Morrow & Co, 1980.
［2］ Negroponte N. Being Digital［M］. New York: Knopf, 1995.
［3］ O'Brien R. Global Financial Integration: The End of Geography［R］. New York: Royal Institute of International Affairs, 1992.
［4］ Cairncross F. Telecommunication: The Death of Distance［Z］. The Economist, 30 September,1995.
［5］ Cairncross F. The Death of Distance［M］. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Business School Press, 1997.
［6］ Batty M. Virtual geography［J］. Futures, 1997, 29 (4~5): 337-352.
［7］ Taylor J. The emerging geographies of virtual worlds［J］. Geographical Review, 1997, 87(2): 172-192.
［8］ Adams P. Cyberspace and virtual place［J］. Geographical Review, 1997, 87 (2): 155-171.
［9］ Adams P. Network topologies and virtual place［J］. Annals of the Association of American Geographers, 1998, 88 (1): 88-106.
［10］Dodge M. The Geographies of Cyberspace［R］. Centre for Advanced Spatial Analysis working paper series, paper 8, University College London,1999.
［11］Donert K. Virtually geography: Aspects of changing geography of information and communications［J］. Geography, 2000, 85 (1): 37-45.
［12］Dodge M. Guest editorial: Cybergeography［J］. Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design, 2001, 28 (1): 1-2.
［13］Gaspar J, Glaeser E L. Information technology and the future of cities［J］. Journal of Urban Economics, 1998, 43: 136-156.
［14］Moss M L. Technology and cities［J］. Cityscape: A Journal of Policy Development and Research, 1998, 3(3): 107-127.
［15］Thrift N. New urban eras and old technological fears: reconfiguring the goodwill of electronic things［J］. Urban Studies, 1996, 33: 1 463-1 493.
［16］Hepworth M. The Geography of the Information Economy［M］. London: Belhaven Press, 1989.
［17］Gottman J. Megalopolis［M］. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 1961.
［18］Mitchelson R, Wheeler J O. The flow of information in a global economy: The role of the American urban system in 1990［J］. Annals of the Association of American Geographers, 1994, 84(1): 87-107.
［19］Gibson W. Neuromancer［M］. New York: Ace, 1984.
［20］Jiang B, Ormeling F J. Mapping Cyberspace: Visualising, Analysing and Exploring Visual Worlds［R］. Centre for Advanced Spatial Analysis working paper series. London: University College, 1999.
［21］Cai G, Sochats K, Williams J. Mapping and analysis of Pennsylvania' s telecommunications infrastructure［A］. Proceedings of ESRI User Conference［C］. San Diego, CA, July 26-30, 1999.
［22］Li F, Whalley J, Williams H. Between physical and electronic spaces: the implications for organisations in the networked economy［J］. Environment and Planning A, 2001, 33: 699-716.
［23］Evens P B, Wurster T S. Strategy and the new economics of information［J］. Harvard Business Review, 1997, 75 (9~10): 71-82.
［24］Graham S, Marvin S. Telecommunications and the City: Electronic Spaces, Urban Places［C］. London: Routledge, 1996.
［25］Castells M. The Rise of the Network Society［M］. Cambridge, MA: Blackwell Publishers, 1996. ［［美］曼纽尔·卡斯特．网络社会的崛起［M］．夏铸九，王志弘，等译．北京：社会科学文献出版社，2001．］
［26］Sassen S, Appiah K A. Globalization and its Discontents: Essays on the New Mobility of People and Money［M］. New York: W W Norton & Co, 1998.
［27］Salomon I. Telecommunications, cities and technological opportunism［J］. Annals of Regional Science, 1996, 30 (1): 75-90.
［28］Steineke J M. The Web and the Cities: Explaining Spatial Patterns of Internet Accessibility and Use in Norway［R］. Rogaland Research, working paper RF-2000/116, 2000.
［29］Kolko J D. The death of cities? The death of distance? Evidence from the geography of commericial internet usage［A］.In:Cities in the Global Information Society Conference［C］. Newcastle-upon-Tyne, UK, November 22-24, 1999.
［30］Mitchell W J. City of Bits: Space, Place, and Infobahn［M］. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 1995. ［［美］威廉·J·米切尔．比特之城［M］．范海燕,胡泳，译．北京：三联书店，1999．］
［31］Moss M L, Townsend A M. Spatial analysis of the Internet in U.S. cities and states［A］. In:Technological Futures-Urban Futures Conference［C］. Durham, England, April 23-25, 1998.
［32］Castells M. The Information City: Information Technology, Economic Restructuring, and the Urban-Regional Process［M］. Oxford, UK: Blackwell, 1989. ［［美］曼纽尔·卡斯泰尔．信息化城市［M］．崔保国，等译．南京：江苏人民出版社，2001．］
［33］Friedmann J, Wolff G. World city formation: an agenda for research and action［J］. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, 1982, 6: 309-343.
［34］Knox P L, Taylor P J, eds. World Cities in a World System［C］. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1995.
［35］Beaverstock J V, Smith R G, Taylor P J. World city network: a new meta-geography［J］. Annals of the Association of American Geographers, 2000, 90 (1): 123-134.
［36］Malecki E J. The Internet: A preliminary analysis of its evolving economic geography［A］.In: Global Economic Geography Conference［C］. Singapore: December 2000.
［37］Zook M A. Old hierarchies or new networks of centrality: The global geography of the Internet content market［J］. American Behavioral Scientist, 2001, 44(10): 1 679-1 696.
［38］Castells M. The culture of cities in the information age［A］. In: Conference Frontiers of the Mind in the Twenty-First Century［C］. Library of Congress, Washington D C, June 14-18, 1999.
［39］Townsend A M. Networked cities and the global structure of the Internet［J］. American Behavioral Scientist, 2001, 44(10): 1 698-1 717.
［40］Moss M L, Townsend A M. Manhattan Leads the 'Net Nation［R］. New York: Taub Urban Research Center, New York University, November,1997.
［41］Moss M L, Townsend A M. Tracking the net: Using domain names to measure the growth of the Internet in US cities［J］. Journal of Urban Technology, 1997, 4 (3): 47-60.
［42］Zook M A. The Web of Consumption: The Spatial Organization of the Internet Industry in the United States［R］. the Association of Collegiate Schools of Planning 1998 Conference, Pasadena, CA, November 5-8, 1998.
［43］Zook M A. The web of production: the economic geography of commercial Internet content production in the United States［J］. Environment and Planning A, 2000, 32: 411-426.
［44］Dodge M, Shiode N. Where on Earth is the Internet? —An empirical investigation of the geography of internet real estate［A］. In: Wheeler J O, Aoyama Y, eds. Cities in the Telecommunications Age: The Fracturing of Geographies［C］. London: Routledge, 1998.43-53. 
［45］Sternberg R, Krymalowski M. Internet domains and the innovativeness of cities/regions —Evidence from Germany and Munich［J］. European Planning Studies, 2002, 10(2): 251-274. 
［46］Wheeler D C, O'Kelly M E. Network topology and city accessibility of the commercial Internet［J］. Professional Geographer, 1999, 51(3): 327-339.
［47］Moss M L, Townsend A M. The internet backbone and the American metropolis［J］. The Information Society Journal, 2000, 16: 35-47.
［48］Gorman S P. The death of distance but no the end of geography: The internet as a network［A］. In: Brunn S D, Leinbach T R, eds. Worlds of Electronic Commerce: Economic, Geographical and Social Dimensions［C］. New York: John Wiley, 2001. 87-105.
［49］Moss M L, Wade C, Wong J L, et al. Municipal government Online: How NYC can Become the Internet City［R］. Prepared for the Office of the Public Advocate for New York and the Accountability Project Inc, New York: Taub Urban Research Center, New York University, 1999.
［50］Moss M L, Wardrip-Fruin N, Harrigan P. New York City Web Guides: An In-depth Analysis of New York City’s Web Presence［R］. New York: Taub Urban Research Center, New York University,1999.
［51］Graham S,Marvin S. Planning Cyber-Cities? Integrating telecommunications into urban planning［J］. Town Planning Review, 1999, 70(1): 89-114.
［52］Graham S. Towards urban cyberspace planning: grounding the global through urban telematics policy and planning［A］. In: Downey J, McGuigan J, eds. Technocities［C］. London: Sage, 1999.
［53］Zook M A. Internet metrics: using host and domain counts to map the Internet［J］. Telecommunications Policy, 2000, 24: 613-620.
［54］Townsend A M. The Internet and the rise of the new network cities, 1969-1999［J］. Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design, 2001, 28(1): 39-58.

[1]	孙中伟,路紫,王杨. 网络信息空间的地理学研究回顾与展望[J]. 地球科学进展, 2007, 22(10): 1005-1011.

阅读次数

全文

摘要

THE URBAN GEOGRAPHY OF CYBERSPACE: REVIEW AND PROSPECT