塑造高街的未来

——空间吸引力和购物选择的太阳模式
Shaping the Future of High Streets:
Place Attraction and the Sun Model of Shopping Choices

马修·卡莫纳
Matthew Carmona

王  维 [ 译 ]
Translated by Wei Wang

摘  要
传统购物街（高街）因受到网上购物迅速发展的影响而出现了生存危机。本文研究了传统商业街的本质以及它
们是如何变化和更新的；通过一个新的太阳模型，将传统形式的零售和网上购物的显著特征概念化，并探讨决
定购物选择的因素；提出我们已经从出行经济和中心主义范式转变为空间吸引力范式；并且，在这个新的背景
下，探讨了塑造传统商业街未来的不同方法。最后提出疑问：什么是可以保证高街未来的关键性空间干预因
素？本文是一篇概念性和推测性的文章，立足于对专业、政策、行业分析交流和实证案例的调研。这些分析为
文章的前半部分提供了参考，概念化了购物选择时的“太阳模型”。尽管后半部分在列举并探讨3个主动型干
预因素时，以来自于英国国内并反映了英国情况的案例以及人们在英格兰所采取的方法作为论据，文章仍是具
有国际视野的。英国在摆脱传统零售业的道路上走得很远，因此随着传统购物街面临的生存危机在世界各地上
演，英国正在探索的数据和政策方法也因此能够揭示许多可能预料到的挑战和机遇。

马修·卡莫纳（规划与城市设计教授，伦敦大学学院巴特莱
特规划学院）
Matthew Carmona, Professor of Planning & Urban Design,
the Bartlett School of Planning, University College London
[译者]王  维（规划师,中规院(北京)规划设计有限公司）
[Translator] Wei Wang, Urban Planner, CAUPD Beijing
Planning & Design Consultants Ltd
参考文献引用格式：
马修·卡莫纳. 塑造高街的未来：空间吸引力和购物选择的
太阳模式[J]. 城市设计, 2022(6): 22-31.
Carmona M. Shaping high street futures: Place
attraction and the sun model of shopping choices [J].
Urban Design, 2022(6): 22-31.
通讯作者：马修·卡莫纳；E-mail: m.carmona@ucl.ac.uk。
Abstract
This paper explores the existential crisis on traditional shopping streets (high streets) driven by the rapid move
to shopping online. The paper examines the nature of traditional shopping streets and how they are changing,
conceptualises the distinguishing characteristics of traditional forms of retail and online shopping, through a new sun
model discusses the factors that determine shopping choices, argues that we have shifted from a movement economy
and centrality paradigm to a place attraction one, and explores, in this new context, the different approaches to shaping
the future of traditional shopping streets. Ultimately, it asks what are the key place-based intervention factors that can
help to guarantee a future for our high streets? This paper is a conceptual and speculative piece, based on the heuristic
investigation of professional, policy, industry discourse and analysis, and empirical evidence. This analysis informs the
first half of the paper in which a “sun model” of shopping choices is conceptualised. The discussion is international
in scope, although much of the evidence draws from sources within and reflecting on the situation in the UK with
approaches taken in England used as a case study in the second half of the paper where three proactive intervention
factors are illustrated and discussed. The UK is particularly advanced on its journey away from traditional retail so the
data and policy approaches being explored in the country reveal much about challenges and opportunities that we might
expect as the existential crisis facing traditional shopping streets plays out around the world.
关键词：高街；空间吸引力范式；太阳模式
Keywords：High streets; Place attraction paradigm; Sun model
DOI:10.16513/j.urbandesign.2022.06.005

22 | 城市设计 2 0 2 2 6
图1 / Figure 1 图2 / Figure 2
理想的(可见的)高街混合排布方式/ The desirable (often invisible) high street mix 尽管仍有一些商业气息,这条高街上的大部分商铺已经被遗弃,剩下的商铺散落在住宅之间
来源 / Source: The Groinfomation Group, Map data @2020 / Whilst a few retail uses still hang on this high street, much of it is abandoned with the
remaining retail interspersed with residential

1 超越出行经济和中心主义的范式 动城市增长的动力。传统上，城市中心地位受 对人们的自豪感和社区认同感似乎特别重要，在

到重视，导致城市活动集中在中心区域，反过 提高主观幸福感的议题中排名第一，不过在被认
传统的商业街往往可以追溯到几个世纪前，
来又支持多样化的零售、娱乐和饮食服务。只 为最需要改善的地方因素中也排名第一 [6]。然而，
诞生在希利尔所命名的出行经济 [1] 的基础之上。
有时间才能证明，2020—2021 年见证的基于技 似乎很清楚的是，
如果要改善传统商业街的前景，
随着人们沿着自然出行走廊的移动，在新兴的
术的加速发展是否标志着曾经有固定位置的、现 可能需要一个新的支撑基础，不依赖于（至少不
城市街道网络中的一些地块的最佳位置，出现
在自由灵活的零售业落位永久地从出行经济和 相同程度地依赖于）出行和中心地位。
了依赖于路人和其所能提供商业机会的功能。
中心化范式向由外部因素决定转变。如果确实如
随着时间的推移，这些功能得到了加强，形成 2 购物选择的太阳模式
此，这些因素是什么，我们又为什么要关心？
了商业街，其中一些成为了热门的目的地。
我们通常认为，高街就是购物的场所。然而， 为了理解这一点，有必要了解人们做出购
虽然 20 世纪下半叶以来以汽车为基础的城
传统高街的一个特点是，它们已经演变成了超 物选择的不同原因。通过对国际博客、论坛、
市化和 21 世纪互联网的发展逐步挑战了这种以 级多样化的地点 [4]。正如英国的数据 [5] 所显示 流行新闻报道和行业新闻网站上讨论的研究，
空间为基础的出行经济，但直到 2020 年新冠大 的，零售用途只是多样化用途的一部分，它既 可以得出 9 个关键因素。图 3 在一个太阳模型
流行到来，这种模式才被打破（至少是暂时的）。 垂直地分布在临近高街的建筑上，又水平地分 中概念化表示了这些因素对实体购物者和网上
英国国家统计局的研究 [2] 显示，电子商务在一 布在临近高街的城市街区腹地（图 1）。 购物者相对重要性的影响。
年内从占比国家总销售额的五分之一左右增长 然而，零售仍然是高街的“公共面孔”， 黄色的因素极大地影响着网上购物者的选
到超过了三分之一。社会普遍察觉，科技可以 通常以活跃和连续的立面形式出现。摆脱实体 择，也是网上购物为什么会逐渐替代传统购物
用来维持人们在家中的生活，使许多人能在足 零售的做法极大地改变了这些街道的体验，去 习惯的有力影响和原因。红色的因素在帮助保
不出户的情况下工作、购物、就餐、娱乐，甚 除并从某种意义上私有化了本来活跃的街道门 留实体客户群方面仍然很有影响力，尽管只有
至获得许多公共和健康服务 [3]。 面（图 2）。 前两个——即时和社交可以被视为“积极”的
这些趋势有可能大大削弱几个世纪以来推 此外，在英国，高质量商店的可获得水平 因素（一些购物者的非技术性参与通常来自于

理论和方法 | 23
 在线购物非常方便，以前需要花费数小时才能完成的任务现在只需点击几下即可完成， 实际情况是，即使是最大的百货公司或购物中心，都会受到其物理规模的制
节省了时间、成本和麻烦。在线购物的方便更能够体现在那些必须去做而不是可选择去 约。但是互联网不会有这样的困扰，网上购物的选择几乎是无限的，尽管面
做的事情（也就是那些因为我们自己想做才去做的事情）上，在网上购物的每个阶段—— 对琳琅满目的产品可能会挑选不过来
访问、搜索、评估、交易和得到物品，都会感受到便利

相对较低的价格给在线购物带来了直接的优势，因为无
去实体店购物通常会伴随着不确定性，客户不确定所寻找 Convenience
论在线购物是否比实体店购买更便宜，通常来说人们普
的物品能不能买到或会不会缺货。在网上购物的话，一旦 便利度
遍认为网上购物更便宜。现实可能更复杂。虽然在线零
付款和安排发货后，客户基本能够确认自己已经锁定这个 售商受益于减少的固定物理性成本——租金、水电费、
物品了。除非客户使用了一些组合式提货的方式，类似“网 Certainty Choice
人力成本等，并且通常受益于有利的税收制度，例如地
上下单，实体店取货 " 的模式，但是一旦开始进行线上操作， 确定性 选择性
方税收减免、在避税天堂注册等，但是他们必须承担个
鼓励客户进人实体店进行购物的战争可能已经失败 性化运输的费用，而这些并不是完全“免费的”

Information Cost Leisure

信息通过两个方向进行流动。即使使用最先进的查看系统，某些 信息 成本 随着日常必需品的在线购买变得越来越容易，人们
休闲
产品也最好在实体店中亲自查看。客户能够直接查看和触摸产品、 去实体商店购物的主要原因变成了休闲、文化或娱
与销售助理沟通、得到个人服务和帮助 , 成为了与在线购物差异 乐。对许多人来说，这个休闲维度代表了传统购物
化的关键性因素。这需要与收集消费者数据且确保他们看到最适 街的主要卖点，但体验取决于在那里的整体游览情
合他们的产品并提供个性化零售体验的能力相结合 况、空间质量以及提供的服务质量。总的来说，这
些需要比在线购物更具吸引力，而在线购物也试图
Non-tech Social 变得越来越有趣
非技术性 社交
逛商店一直是一种宝贵的社交机会。从结识朋友，到保持联
Immediate
系和分享八卦，再到与服务人员和其他购物者的接触，这种
实体店仍然为那些不会使用新兴科技和资源的人提供以实体交 即时性
接触有助于个人健康 ( 尤其是对于那些无法工作的人 ) 以及对
易、现金付款等传统方式获取商品和服务的方法。但是对于不
太富裕、对外联系较少和不太精通技术的群体而言，确实存在 尽管在线购物的物流交付时间已大大缩短，但即使是最高效的物流系 他人的学习和宽容。在线购物——社交网络驱动的商业行为，
数字化鸿沟，实体购物的需求仍在，然而这类需求在萎缩 统也无法像实体零售一样立即获得产品。进一步压缩交付时间需要更 在推动巨大销售量的同时，却没有任何在现实世界中接触的
小、更本地化的物流站，并在经济和环境方面带来成本 面对面型的社会效益，并且存在明显的危害

图3 / Figure 3
将购物选择概念化的太阳模型/ The sun model, conceptualising shopping choices

必要性而不是选择）。橙色的因素为所有购物 和非空间的城市化过程（图 4）。 影响。举例来说，新冠大流行前的证据表明，城

者的决定提供信息，其中深橙色可能对实体购 因此，设置在城市边缘大量免费停车场中 外零售业比传统高街衰退得更厉害 [9]。
物群体更重要。成本在浅橙色范围中，是任何 的零售仓提供了一个跳板，它同样拥有定义在 这揭示了一个关键的概念性区别，即实体
购买决定中的一个因素，但却能够支撑更广泛 线零售体验的“4C”——便利性（convenience， 零售需要解决的影响因素和相关挑战的规模。
的比价。成本促使消费者更频繁地在网上进行 对 于 那 些 有 车 的 人）、 更 多 的 选 择（greater 图 5 展示了主要由单个零售商店（单店或连锁店）
购物，而不是进行线下购物。 choice，鉴于这些场所的规模）、更大的确定性 决定的因素（左）和与特定市场有关的因素（右），
审视这个模式的话，很明显，没有任何一 （greater certainty，鉴于所提供的库存）和更低 无论是互联网，还是特定的城镇或城市中心。
个卖场（相对于零售商），无论是在线上还是线 的成本（reduced cost，鉴于其规模经济、较低 抛开财政税收和激励措施不谈，在空间因
下，能够提供该模式中所提出的全部东西。事实 的租金和较低的管理费用）[7]。 素的范畴内，公共部门（和大型私人零售投资者，
上，没有任何模式能够垄断太阳模式中的任何一 如购物中心的业主）希望影响其特定市场的未
个因素。相反，它们提供了各种优秀特征的组合。 3 购物中心与空间因素 来。相比之下，商店因素反映了用于购物的渠
同时，网上商店的最大优势领域——“4C”模式， 可以说，所有这些优势有如火箭般推动着 道的简单性（例如，你不能在互联网上触摸东西，
往往是非常直接和具体的，传统零售商很难与之 网络世界的发展。一些稍早的来自购物者的证 但你可以确定通过点击几下鼠标来购买大多数
竞争。在这方面，实体零售业的优势让人联想到 据表明，在新冠大流行之后，他们更喜欢城外 产品），或者是由所追求的特定零售模式决定
图中的夕阳，尽管它们所面对的挑战并不是新鲜 零售业的停车场和更大更宽敞的购物空间，而 的因素（例如，雇用有礼貌、能够提供帮助的
事物了，但这却不是偶然。 不是市中心更拥挤的空间 [8]。然而，从长远来看， 助手，或者在线提供良好的技术描述）。
在网络零售兴起之前的几十年里，人们讨 可能正是这些基于空间的差异，使得传统商业街
论的焦点是城外零售业对传统高街的负面影响。 能够在网络购物模式的冲击下， 得以适应和生存。 4 对于基于空间因素的干预
从实际上来看，这些改变可以被视为是一段从 相比之下，在类型上更接近于在线购物的城外零 面对这种情况，政府（国家和地方）可能
混合、整合和空间依赖的城市化到分离、分散 售，可能会在持续的零售业裁员中受到更严重的 会采取 3 种策略。

24 | 城市设计 2 0 2 2 6
 在线零售 城外零售 传统购物街道
Online retail Out-of-town retail Traditional shopping street
Convenience

购物

Out
便利度

let f
中心

acto
因素
Choice

rs
Certainty
选择性
确定性

Information Cost Leisure

信息 成本 休闲

空间
Plac
Non-tech Social

e fac
非技术性 社交

因素
Immediate

tors
即时性

图4 / Figure 4 图5 / Figure 5
一段从混合、整合和空间依赖的城市化到分离、分散和非空间的城市化旅程/ The journey from mixed, integrated and 购物中心因素和空间因素/ Outlet and place factors
place-dependent to separated, disintegrated and non-place urbanism

（1）达尔文主义适者生存的策略，根据自 针在不同时期似乎都支持上述第一种和第二种策 于转型期（因为白领工人越来越多地选择在家工

由市场中消费者的选择来调整供给，自然进化。 略，尽管可能没有对第三种策略采取一致的做法。 作），小规模制造业和社区功能所产生的价值较
（2）一种干预性战略，利用财政激励、积 低，投资者的合理做法将是关注于住宅，在受影
极规划、公共投资和与私人利益集团的合作， 5 解除管制——点对点复兴 响的街道上形成一个“缺口”。
积极主动地支持实体零售。 第一种策略反映在政府的解除管制倾向中， Chapman-Cavanagh 指出，“将零售业转换
（3）一种混合模式，其干预措施比较有限， 体现在越来越多地使用许可开发权（PDR），绕 为住宅并不是唯一的解决方案，至关重要的是，
主要集中在消除不良的社会和环境影响。 过所需的规划许可，来提供更多的住房。尽管 此类开发项目应寻求与现有的零售空间合作，
历史证据表明高街能够随着时间的推进以 有报告称以这种方式提供的住宿质量很差 [13]， 并带来新的充满活力的空间，使底层和店面充满
一种自然的方式去适应和改变 [10]。这种复原力 2021 年 3 月仍然几乎完全以解决英格兰商业街 活力”[12]。然而，作为放松管制的替代方案，干
是许多历史性商业街的特点，而且根据观察， 危机为理由，进一步将开放正当化。这些变化赋 预要复杂得多，涉及规划、设计和管理的领域。
在其存在的大部分时间里，这些街道在很大程 予了 PDR 一个新的超级类别（E 类），允许将
度上是以类似于上述第一种策略的方式生存下 所有商业、商务和服务用途转换为住宅用途 [14]。 6 干预——通过积极主动的规划来进行塑造
去的。同时，也并非所有公民都同样的健康、 政府认为，在这些地方许可更多的住房将 与解除管制的意愿所相反，英国政府面临着
富有和精通技术，因此也同样能够适应市场的 使用途多样化，并通过在步行距离内的更多人口 越来越大的紧迫感，采取了更加积极的做法来发
任何变化，特别是如果商业街的丰富生态转移 来支持零售。然而，这样做的副作用是取消了几 展高街，其在 2011 年拨款了 120 万英镑来实施
到网上。这样的实际情况衍生了第二项策略， 乎唯一的政府管控机制（尽管很粗糙），缺少了 “Portas pilot”计划 [15]，到了 2019 年，这个数字
或被描述为“干预的战略案例”[11]。 公共部门的管控权之后，地方当局无法“指导” 提升到了 10 亿英镑。遗憾的是，在资源配置上
在英格兰，新冠大流行导致全国范围内约 高街的功能组合。因此，这将产生一个关键性危 的逐步改变并没有带来愿景里的逐步改变，资金
25% 的零售空间供应过剩，在这种情况下，第三 机，管制的放松可能会减少它所试图注入的多样 往往集中在有限的一次性资本项目上，而不是一
种策略被认为是更加务实的 [12]。当前的政策方 性。考虑到零售业处于危机之中，办公市场也处 些评论家所呼吁的对高街的根本性重新思考。

理论和方法 | 25
 Convenience
便利度

Certainty Choice
确定性 选择性

需求
Declining Shopping street 平常 s
eed
衰退的购物街 aic n
Pros

Information Cost Leisure

信息 成本 休闲

Ad hoc residential conversion and infill

点对点的住宅转变和填充

Social
Non-tech
社交

Enric
非技术性

丰富
hing

性需
Immediate

need
即时性

求
s
Planned shrinkage and intensification
经过规划的缩减和集中

图6 / Figure 6 图7 / Figure 7
购物街的空间策略/ Spatial strategies for shopping street 丰富性需求和平常需求/ Enriching vs. prosaic factors

举例来说，Bill Grimsey 认为每个城镇中心 象。太阳模型也可以用类似的方式来解释，与 8 干预——通过主动策划进行塑造

都应该有一个特定的规划 [16]。在这种情况下， 购物相关的因素更为普遍，与人类渴望相聚和
核心零售区应该被界定和保护，而次要区域的 享受相关的因素占更少数（图 7）。
零售业应该允许通过转换为住宅用途和对有价 新冠大流行前的研究证实，这些丰富性的
值的本地零售商搬迁相结合的方式而缩小。 需求与街道的质量之间有很大的关联 [19]。通过
Maccreanor Lavington 等指出，有计划的收缩能 比较那些有和没有重大公共领域重新设计和投
够鼓励对保留下来的临街面的改善，包括在零
资的高街，可以看出街道结构质量的改善能够
售业上方和后方建造住宅，避免在临街面出现
鼓励人们多行走和停留，最终提高了周围零售
永久性漏洞的问题 [17]（图 6）。
空间被光顾的次数，减少了空置率。
这样的战略依赖于监管以及更积极的规划、
英国政府为该国高街的紧急设计干预提供
公共与私人伙伴关系、潜在的土地与财政的组
了资金，这为在新冠大流行之后的情况提供了
合开发。它将受益于一个既定趋势，即越来越
多的人口居住在步行距离以内的高街附近，这 一些相似的可能性，“这是一个契机，我们需
一人口的增长速度是其他地方的两倍 [5]。 要采取行动，来将步行和骑行作为新的长期通
勤习惯的一部分，并享受因此而带来的健康品
7 干预——通过主动设计进行塑造 质、优质空气和降低的城市拥堵水平” 。由
Gehl 极好地将公共空间的使用区分成了必 此产生的变化有时是暂时的，有时是永久的（图
要的、可选择的和社会性的活动 [18]，反映了如 8），但在关注“步行和骑行的新时代”
果人们要真正参与到空间中来，他们需要有这 推动了全国范围内的变化，并在促进商店消费
[22]
样区分的想法，而空间正是适宜这么区分的对 方面取得了良好的成效 。 共部门管理的街道上，但现实中业主分散，资
Abrahams 认为，为了生存，“高街需要找
到新的目标，成为客户体验创新的最新舞台”[23]。
从更大范围来看，街道本身也需要成为这种积
极体验的一部分。这对传统购物来说是一个重
大挑战，因为其竞争者——互联网平台、购物
中心甚至城外的零售店，都是经过高度策划的，
以便在其便利性、提供的选择性以及浏览这些
选择的体验方面进行优化。
例如，大型购物中心的管理者早就明白混
合零售、娱乐、活动空间和餐厅的价值，以保
持用户的回头率，并鼓励以优化消费的方式进
行流动 [24]。放弃对混合度的把控，并将非活跃
的用途纳入其中，就像英国高街的去管制化一
[20]
样，将会带来不好的影响。城镇中心管理（Town
Centre Management） 和 商 业 改 进 区（Business
[21]
中， Improvement Districts，BIDs） 以 各 种 名 义 发
展起来，试图将私营部门的管理方法转移到公

26 | 城市设计 2 0 2 2 6
暂时的人行道拓宽 Short-term pavement widenging 永久的新建自行车道 permanent new cycle lanes

图8 / Figure 8
重新定义街道空间的优先权/ Re-prioritising street space

源有限，且公共部门缺乏对传统高街日益增长 9 通过空间吸引力的法则来进行总结 优先考虑主动干预，改善那些能够使人们积极

的威胁的关注，这些问题限制了上述手段产生 到访的空间因素的高街，能够继续生存和发展。
如今，传统高街面临着生存危机，它们如何
作用 [25]。 而那些不这么做的高街则会衰退和消失。
应对危机决定了它们将拥有一个长期的未来，还
虽然公共部门在大多数城镇中心通常只直
是注定不可避免地衰退。从分析中可以得出这样
接控制有限数量的建筑，但其确实能够对公共
的结论：政府、地方政府和高街管理者需要系统
服务进行控制，比如将它们重新落位在高街上
地针对本文前半部分所探讨的太阳模型中所包含
和公共空间上 [4]。地方政府可以（与私人合作 参考文献
的4个关键的、基于空间的购物选择因素进行思考。
伙伴一起）在公共空间部署临时用途，以提升 References
将这些因素与本文后半部分讨论的 3 个主
使用感受，如从有趣的活动（如活动、博览会 [1] Hillier B. Cities as movement economies [J].Urban
动干预因素（图 10）对照，并回答一开始提出
和展览）到零售机会（如农贸市场），再到艺 Design International, 1996, 1(1): 41-60.
术作品和表演。更多积极的地方政府也在介入 的问题：什么是有助于保证传统高街未来发展 [2] Office for National Statistics. Internet sales as a total

其中，重新关注那些价格低廉的零售资产，以 的关键空间因素（图 11）。 of retail sales (ratio) (%)[EB/OL].[2022-10-23](2021-12-

17). https://www.ons.gov.uk/businessindustryandtrade/
便重新利用它们，更好地满足当地需求 [26]。更 在这样做的过程中，分析得出的结论是，
retailindustry/timeseries/j4mc/drsi.
为激进的是，城镇中心投资区（TCIZs）等模式 如果我们希望避免这些有价值的地方和它们所 [3] Read S. No full-time return to the office for over a
试图将所有权和责任集中在一个单一的投资公 承载的丰富的功能生态进一步衰退，那么答案 million[EB/OL].[2022-10-23](2021-05-06). https://www.
司中，专注于集体策划整个街道 [27]。 只能在更多和更好的公共部门干预中找到，而 bbc.co.uk/news/business-56972207.
不是在与私人行为者的合作中减少。我们已经超 [4] Carmona M. London’s local high streets: The problems,
将各种不同的措施放在一起来说，可以用
potential and complexities of mixed street corridors [J].
一个阶梯来表示，从被动的零售环境策划措施 越了旧的出行经济和中心主义范式，不能因为人
Progress in Planning, 2015, 100: 1-84.
（英格兰一般会采取的措施）到更积极的措施， 们肯定会出现在这些地方而只关注于地方的位 [5] Office for National Statistics. High streets in Great
再到完全控制型措施（图 9）。 置本身，而是要关注这个地方的空间质量。那些 Britain[EB/OL].[2022-10-23](2019-06-06). https://

理论和方法 | 27
 Proactive planning Proactive design Proactive curation
主动规划 主动设计 主动管理
e.g. 15-minute city model e.g. barrier-free public e.g. parking & pick-up
Investment zones (in 如:15分钟城市模型 realm strategy
Total control
partnership) 如:无障碍的公共空间 如:即停即走机制
完全控制
开发区 (有伙伴关系的) Convenience 便捷度
Ownership (usually e.g. shrink retail to e.g. safe and equitable e.g. public investment in mix
selective) consolidate space 如:公共投资组合
掌控权 (通常是有选择性的) 如:通过缩减零售业来加强基础 如:安全和公平合理的空间

Public realm design/

activation Choice 选择性
公共空间设计和活化
e.g. entertainment & e.g. fun features & e.g. fun events and
Proactive curation cultural provision temporary uses activities
Re-zoning/re-planning 主动管理 如:提供娱乐和文化用途 如:有趣的特征和临时性用途 如:有趣的活动和展会
重新计划/规划
Leisure 休闲
Regulation (of uses/
development) e.g. safeguard social e.g. high quality public e.g. stimulate evening
制度 (针对用途和发展) spaces i.e. markets spaces economy
如:有保障的社会空间(市场) 如: 高质量的公共空间 如: 刺激夜经济
Persuasion (via for
example TCM)
劝导 (通过 TCM 这样的方式)
Social 社交
Passive curation
被动管理

图9 / Figure 9 图10 / Figure 10

零售业管理的梯形结构/ Ladder of retail curation 空间吸引力法则: 空间依赖的购物选择因素与针对传统购物街的主动干预因素(以及指示性的政策回应)/ The place
attraction paradigm: Place-based shopping choice factors against proactive intervention factors for
traditional shopping streets (and indicative policy responses)

www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/
populationandmigration/populationestimates/articles/highstr
eetsingreatbritain/2019-06-06.
[6] Ussher K, Rotik M, Jeyabraba M. Everyday places:
Creating strong locations to support daily life in Britain [D]
London: Demos, 2021.
[7] Furmanik G. High Streets vs. Shopping Centres [EB/
OL]. [2022-10-23] (2020-05-28). https://blog.realla.co.uk/
high-streets-vs-shopping-centres.
[8] Partridge J. Shoppers shun high streets in England
and Northern Ireland, data shows [EB/OL]. (2020-
07-13) [2022-10-23]. https://www.theguardian.com/
business/2020/jul/13/shoppers-avoiding-high-streets-
england-northern-ireland-data-shows.
[9] Grimsey B.The Grimsey review: An alternative future
for the high street [EB/OL].[2022-10-23]. http://www.
vanishinghighstreet.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/03/
GrimseyReview04.092.pdf.
[10] Vaughan L, Törmä I, Dhanani A, et al. An ecology of
the suburban hedgerow, or: How high streets foster diversity
over time [R]. London: The 10th International Space Syntax
Symposium, 2015.
[11] We made That & LSE Cities. High streets for all [D].
London: Greater London Authority,2017.
[12] Chapman-Cavanagh T.Tomorrow’s town centres are
tomorrow’s habitats [J]. Planning in London, 2021, 117: 62-63.
[13] Clifford B, Canelas P, Ferm J, et al.Research into the
quality standard of homes delivered through change of use
permitted development rights [D]. London:Department for
Housing, Communities and Local Government, 2020.
[14] Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local
Government.Supporting housing delivery and public service
delivery [EB/OL]. (2021-03-31) [2022-10-23]. https://
www.gov.uk/government/consultations/supporting-housing-
delivery-and-public-service-infrastructure/supporting-
housing-delivery-and-public-service-infrastructure.
[15] Portas M.The Portas review: An independent review
into the future of high streets [EB/OL]. [2022-10-23].
https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/
system/uploads/attachment_data/file/6292/2081646.pdf.
[16] Grimsey N.The Grimsey review 2: it’s time to reshape
our town centres [EB/OL]. [2022-10-23]. http://www.
vanishinghighstreet.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/07/
GrimseyReview2_new1.pdf.
[17] Lavington M, Associates P B, Harrington G.
Accommodating growth in town centres: Achieving
successful housing intensification and high street
diversification [D]. London: Greater London Authority.
[18] Gehl J.Life between buildings: using public space [M].
3rd edition. Skive: Arkitektens Forlag, 1996.
[19] Carmona M, Gabrieli T, Hickman R, et al.Street appeal:
The value of street improvements summary report [EB/OL].
[2022-10-23]. http://content.tfl.gov.uk/street-appeal.pdf.
[20] Furness R. Emergency active travel funding indicative
allocations: Unpublished letter to chief executives and
London borough transport officers and Transport for London
[D]. London: Department for Transport.
[21] Department for Transport.£2 billion package to create
a new era for walking and cycling [EB/OL] (2020-05-09)
[2022-10-23]. https://www.gov.uk/government/news/2-
billion-package-to-create-new-era-for-cycling-and-walking.
[22] Living Streets. The pedestrian pound: the business
case for better streets and places [EB/OL]. [2022-10-23].
https://www.livingstreets.org.uk/media/3890/pedestrian-
pound-2018.pdf.
[23] Abrahams D. High streets need to rediscover their
raison d’être [J]. Planning in London, 2021, 117: 15.
[24] Carmona M.Public place urban spaces: the dimensions
of urban design [M]. London: Routledge, 2021.
[25] Otsuka N, Reeve A. The contribution and potential
of town centre management for regeneration: shifting its
focus from “Management” to “Regeneration” [J]. The Town
Planning Review, 2007, 78(2): 225-250.
[26] Clark T.The great council retail property takeover [EB/
OL]. (2019-12-04) [2022-10-23]. https://www.drapersonline.
com/news/the-great-council-retail-property-takeover.
[27] British Property Federation (BPF). Town centre
investment zones: Getting investment back into the high
street [D]. London: BPF, 2016.

28 | 城市设计 2 0 2 2 6
 主动设计:重新设计公共空间,包括拓宽人行步道、移除停车空间、新建公共空间、新建骑行专用车道、座椅、
路灯和广告牌/ Proactive design: Public realm re-design, including widening pavements, removing
parking, a new public space, new bike lanes, seating, lighting and signage

主动规划: 在次要商业零售区域的高密度住宅/ proactive planning: Higher density 主动管理: 当地政府在原来是Cooperative超市的地方设计了Vue电影院和餐厅结合的混合用途,试图将该

residential apartments supported living apartments located in marginal secondary 位置打造成休闲用途/ Proactive curation: Local authority developed a Vue cinema and restaurant
retail locations complex on the site of a former Cooperative department store, anticipating the turn to leisure

图11 / Figure 11
Eltham高街/ Eltham High Street

ORIGINAL TEXTS IN ENGLISH
Shaping the Future of High Streets:
Place Attraction and the Sun Model of
Shopping Choices
Matthew CARMONA
1 Beyond a movement economy and centrality
paradigm
Traditional shopping streets often go back centuries,
by what Hillier christened the movement economy[1].
As people moved along natural movement corridors, the
optimum position of some land parcels in an emerging
urban street network allowed the establishment of
functions that relied on passers-by and the business
opportunities they presented. Over time these functions
were reinforced and commercial streets emerged with
some becoming destinations in their own right.
Whilst the growth of car-based urbanisation
in the second half of the 20th century and of the
Internet in the 21st has progressively challenged this
place-based movement economy, it was the arrival
of the Covid-19 pandemic in 2020 that broke it (at
least temporarily). Figures from the UK’s Office for
National Statistics[2] show that e-commerce grew in a
single year from around a fifth of total sales to over a
third. Society quickly found that technology can be
used to sustain people in their homes, allowing many
to work, shop, eat out (at home), entertain themselves,
and even access many public and health services
without ever venturing beyond their front doors[3].
These trends have the potential to significantly
undermine the dynamics that have driven urban
growth for centuries. Traditionally, centrality has been
prized, leading to urban centres with a concentration
of activities that in turn support a diverse retail,
entertainment and eating offer. Only time will tell if
the rapid technology-based acceleration witnessed in
2020/21 marks a permanent shift from the movement
economy and centrality paradigm to one in which
other factors dictate where once physically situated
and now foot-loose retail locates. If that is the case,
what are those factors and why should we care?
We often perceive high streets as places that
are all about the shopping. Yet a characteristic of
traditional high streets is that they have evolved to
become super-diverse places[4]. As UK data shows[5],
retail uses are only a part of the total mix which is
spread both vertically up the buildings that front onto
high streets and horizontally into the hinterland of the
urban blocks lining them (Figure 1).
Retail, nevertheless, remains the “public face”
of high streets, often in the form of an active and
continuous frontage. A move away from physical
retail significantly changes the experience of these
streets, removing and in a sense privatising previously
active frontages (Figure 2).
Moreover, access to good quality shops seems
to be particularly important in people’s sense of pride
and community, in the UK coming first amongst the
issues that boost subjective well-being, although also
first amongst local place factors considered most in
need of improving[6]. What seems clear, however, is
that if the outlook for traditional shopping streets is to
improve, then a new basis for support may be required
that is not dependent (at least not to the same degree)
on movement and centrality.
2 The sun model of shopping choices
To understand this, it is necessary to understand
the different reasons people choose to make the
shopping choices they do. Reviewing discussions

理论和方法 | 29
from a wide range of international blogs, fora, popular
news reports and industry news sites, revealed nine
critical factors. Figure 3 represents these in a sun
model that conceptualises the relative significance of
factors for physical versus online shoppers.
Factors coloured yellow strongly inform the
choices of online shoppers and are the reasons why
online has become such a powerful disrupter of
traditional shopping habits. Factors in red remain
influential in helping to retain a physical customer-
base, although only the first two — immediate and
social — are what might be seen as “positive” factors
(the non-technological engagement of some shoppers
typically stems from necessity rather than choice).
Factors in orange inform the decisions of all shoppers,
but darker orange is likely to be more important to
physical shoppers. Cost, in lighter orange, is always
a factor in any purchase decision, but in allowing
extensive shopping around with ease, cost drives
consumers to shop online more often than it keeps
them in bricks and mortar.
Examining the model, it is clear that no single
outlet (as opposed to retailer) — whether online or
off — can offer everything, and indeed no mode has a
monopoly on any of the factors represented in the sun
model. Instead, they offer combinations of qualities.
At the same time, the areas of greatest strength for
online outlets — the four “C”s — tend to be very
direct and tangible, against which traditional retailers
struggle to compete. In this respect, it is no accident
that physical retail advantages are reminiscent of a
setting sun in the figure, albeit that the challenges they
encompass are nothing new.
For decades before e-retailing took off, discussions
focussed around the perceived negative impact of out-
of-town retailing on traditional hight streets. Looking
at them physically, those changes can be viewed as
part of a journey from mixed, integrated and place-
dependent urbanism to separated, disintegrated and
non-place urbanism (Figure 4).
Thus, retail boxes set in amongst extensive free
car parking on the edge of cities offered a stepping-
off point towards the same four “C”s that define the
online retail experience — convenience (for those
with cars), greater choice (given the size of many
of these units), greater certainty (given the stock on
offer) and reduced cost (given their economies of
scale, lower rents, and lower overheads) [7].
3 Outlet vs. place factors
Arguably all these advantages have been given
30 | 城市设计 2 0 2 2 6
rocket-boosters in the online world whose sun is
relentlessly rising. Early evidence from shoppers in
the aftermath of the Covid-19 pandemic demonstrated
a preference for the car parks and larger more
spacious footplate formats of out-of-town retail over
the more crowded spaces of town centres[8]. In the
long term, however, it may be exactly their place-
based differentiation from the online model that will
allow traditional shopping streets to adapt and survive.
By contrast, out-of-town, which is much closer in type
to online, could suffer more severely in the ongoing
cull of retail. Pre-pandemic evidence, for example,
indicated that out-of-town retail was in a steeper
decline than traditional high streets[9].
This reveals a critical conceptual distinction
relating to the scale at which the factors and
associated challenges of physical retailing need to be
addressed. Figure 5 shows factors (on the left) that
are predominantly determined within individual retail
outlets (singular or chains) and those on the right that
relate to the particular marketplace — the internet at
large, or the particular town or city centre.
Setting fiscal taxes and incentives aside, it is
within the place factors that the public sector (and
large private retail investors, e.g. owners of shopping
malls) can hope to influence the future of their
particular marketplace. Outlet factors, by contrast,
reflect either the simple realities of the channel used
to shop (e.g. you can’t touch things on the Internet
but you can be certain to purchase most products with
a few clicks of a mouse), or are factors determined
by the particular retail model pursued (e.g. the
employment of polite, helpful assistants versus the
availability of good technical descriptors online).
4 Intervening in place-based factors
Faced with this, governments (national and
local) might adopt one of three strategies:
1. The Darwinian strategy of letting the fittest
survive with natural evolution adjusting provision in
line with consumer choices made within a free market;
2. An interventionalist strategy in which fiscal
incentives, active planning, public investment and
collaborative engagement with private interests are
used to proactively support physical retail;
3. A mixed model in which intervention is more
limited and focusses largely on smoothing undesirable
social and environmental impacts.
Historical evidence reveals how high streets have
been able to adapt and change over time in a more
or less natural way[10]. This resilience is a feature of
many historic shopping streets, and it is hard to escape
the observation that for most of their existence, such
streets have been largely left to fend for themselves in
a manner akin to the first of the strategies above. At the
same time, not all citizens are equally fit, wealthy and
technologically savvy and therefore equally able to adapt
to whatever the market throws up, particularly if the
rich ecology of high streets moves online. Such a reality
supports the second of the strategies, or what has been
described as “the strategic case for intervention” [11].
In England where the aftermath of the pandemic
has resulted in an estimated 25% over-provision of retail
space nationally, a pragmatic argument might be made
for the third position[12]. This is reflected in current policy
approaches that at different times seem to support both
the first and second approaches above, although not,
perhaps, as a coherent approach to the third.
5 De-regulation — Ad-hoc renewal
The first approach is reflected in the de-regulatory
predilections of Government as encapsulated in the
increasing use of permitted development rights (PDR) —
by-passing the need for planning permission — to deliver
more housing. Undaunted by reports of the poor quality
of accommodation being delivered in this way[13], further
liberalisations in March 2021 were justified almost
entirely on the need to tackle the crisis on England’s high
streets. The changes gave PDR rights to a new mega-
class (Class E) allowing the conversion of all commercial,
business and service uses to residential[14].
The Government argued that allowing more
housing in such locations will diversify uses and help
to support retail through having larger populations
within walking distance. A side effect, however, is the
removal of almost the only (albeit crude) mechanism,
short of public sector ownership, for local authorities
to “direct” an appropriate mix of uses on high streets.
A key danger, therefore, is that deregulation might
reduce the very diversity that it seeks to inject. Given
the choice between the uncertainties of a retail industry
in crisis, an office market also in transition (as white-
collar workers increasingly choose to work from
home), and the low values associated with small scale
manufacturing and community functions, the logical
approach for investors will be to run to residential,
leaving a “gap-toothed” appearance on affected streets.
Chapman-Cavanagh note that “converting retail
to residential is not the sole solution, and it is vital
that such developments seek to work collaboratively
with existing retail spaces, as well as bringing in new
vibrant spaces to animate ground floors and shopfronts”
[12]
. Intervention, as the alternative to deregulation,
however, is far more complex, cutting across the realms
of planning, design and curation.
6 Intervention — shaping through proactive
planning
In contrast to its deregulatory instincts, the
UK government, with increasing urgency has also
encouraged a more active approach to the nation’s
high streets, moving from a small £1.2 million fund
in 2011 to implement “Portas pilot” schemes[15] up
to a £1 billion fund in 2019. The step-change in
resourcing has not, unfortunately, been followed by a
step-change in vision, with funding tending to focus
on limited one-off capital projects, rather than on the
fundamental re-thinking of high streets called for by
some commentators.
Bill Grimsey, for example, argued that every town
centre should have a dedicated plan[16]. In this the core
retail area should be defined and protected whilst retail
in secondary areas should be allowed to shrink through
a combination of conversion to residential uses and the
active relocation of valued local retailers. Maccreanor
Lavington et al. note that planned shrinkage can
encourage an intensification in the frontage that remains
— including by building residential over and behind
retail — avoiding the problem of permanent holes
appearing in frontages[17] (Figure 6).
Such a strategy relies on regulation, alongside
more proactive planning, public/private partnership
and potentially land and property assembly and
development. It would benefit from the already well-
established trend of a growing population living within
walking distance of high streets, a population that has
been increasing at double the rate of other locations[5].
7 Intervention — shaping through proactive
design
Gehl famously distinguishes between necessary,
optional and social activities in the use of public
space[18], reflecting the idea that for people to really
engage in places they need to do so because the place
is appropriately conducive. The sun model can be
interpreted in a similar way, with the more prosaic
factors associated with shopping set against the smaller
number of enriching factors related to the very human
desire to be together and enjoy ourselves (Figure 7).
Pre-pandemic research confirmed a strong
association between these enriching needs and the
quality of streets[19]. By comparing high streets that
had been subject to significant public realm re-
design and investment to those that had not, the
work identified that improvements to the quality of
the street fabric encouraged people to walk more, to
stay longer and ultimately boosted the desirability of
surrounding retail space and reduced vacancy.
UK Government funding for emergency design
interventions in the country’s high streets in the
wake of the COVID pandemic envisaged similar
possibilities: “We have a window of opportunity to
act now to embed walking and cycling as part of new
long-term commuting habits and reap the associated
health, air quality and congestion benefits” [20] .
Resulting changes have sometimes been temporary
and sometimes permanent (Figure 8), but in focusing
on a “new era of walking and cycling” [21] have driven
changes nationally with a proven track record of
boosting spend in shops[22].
8 Intervention — shaping through proactive
curation
Abrahams comments that, in order to survive,
“the high street will need to find new purpose in
becoming the latest arena for customer experience
innovation” [23]. Extrapolating to the larger scale, the
street itself now also needs to be part of that positive
experience. This represents a major challenge for
traditional shopping when the competition — Internet
platforms, shopping malls and even out-of-town retail
parks — are highly curated in order to optimise the
experience in terms of its convenience, the choice on
offer, and the experience of navigating those choices.
Managers of large shopping malls, for example,
have long understood the value of mixing retail,
entertainment, event spaces, and restaurants in order to
keep users coming back and to encourage movement
in a manner that optimises spend[24]. The thought of
giving up control on the mix and incorporating non-
active uses into it as suggested by the de-regulatory
(PDR) changes impacting on English high streets
would be an anathema. Town Centre Management, in
various guises, and Business Improvement Districts
(BIDs) have developed in an attempt to transfer
private sector methods to publicly managed streets,
but the reality of fragmented ownerships, limited
resources and a lack of focus in the public sector on
the growing threats to traditional high streets have
combined to limit their impact[25].
While the public sector, typically, has direct
control of only a limited stock of buildings in most
town centres, it does have control over key public
services — with the potential to re-locate them back
onto high streets[4] — and of the public realm. Local
authorities can (along with private partners) deploy
temporary uses in the public realm in order to curate
the experience, ranging from fun activities (e.g. events,
fairs and demonstrations) to retail opportunities (e.g.
farmers markets), to works of art and performance.
More proactive English local authorities are also
stepping in to pick up cheap retail assets in order
to re-purpose them to better serve local needs [26].
More radically still, models such as Town Centre
Investment Zones (TCIZs) seek to pool ownerships and
responsibility in a single investment vehicle focussed
on collectively curating entire streets[27].
Together, the range of different approaches can
be represented on a ladder that moves from passive
approaches to curating retail environments (the
normal approach in England) to more active ones, and
to total control models (Figure 9).
9 A place attraction paradigm to conclude
Today, traditional shopping streets face an
existential crisis, and how they react will determine
whether they have a long-term future or are
doomed to inevitable decline. Drawing from the
analysis, it is possible to conclude that governments,
local governments and those with management
responsibilities for high streets need to systematically
consider their responses to the four critical place-based
shopping choice factors contained in the sun model
explored in the first half of this paper.
Setting these against the three proactive
intervention factors discussed in the latter part
(Figure 10) begins to answer the question posed at the
begiming, What are the key place-based factors that
will help to guarantee a future for traditional shopping
streets (Figure 11)?
In doing so the analysis concludes that if we wish
to avoid the sun setting further on these valued places
and the rich ecologies of functions they host, then the
answer can only be found in more and better public
sector intervention, not less, working in partnership
with private actors. We have moved beyond the old
movement economy and centrality paradigm where
just to be in the right place was enough because people
would come, to a paradigm in which place quality is
all. High streets which prioritise proactive intervention
in order to address the place-based factors that make
people actively wish to visit will survive and thrive.
Those that don’t will surely decline and die.
理论和方法 | 31