注意到世界上越來越多的城市成功申請成為聯合國教科文組織全球學習型城市網絡的成員，我於上一篇文章中試圖闡明終身學習政策對地方發展之重要性，以及於應對新冠疫情對先前規範之挑戰後，迫切的重新省思城市為公民提供服務的方式。

在這裡，我將回到城市發展中的教育與學習政策這個主題。我認為，近期的教育政策，正如海格近幾十年來強調那所謂的「經濟轉向」，但並無像制定地方政策那樣的説明，教育政策與城市發展政策皆將受益於對學習及實施之意涵，更廣泛的共同理解。若市政決策目標為實現綜合城市之發展戰略，除了交通、環境、住宅與經濟發展等領域方面，亦需包括教育。

經驗證實，當前的城市規劃似乎並不常將空間知識與規劃知識，其領域內之教育知識進行連結。例如，對美國城市規劃學者知識領域之分析（Sanchez & Afzalan, 2020），並沒有在他們感興趣之主題中提及教育，儘管其確實包括其他社會政策之問題，例如：健康與不平等。

城市規劃賦予城鎮之型態與結構。其聚焦於建築物、運輸系統、公共空間，以及社會與文化設施之安排與設計。其亦關係到經濟發展與創設條件，且與氣候變化及環境碳排放日益嚴重之後果具關聯性。其旨於促進居民之經濟福祉、宜居性，以及健康與安全。

近幾十年來，隨著越來越多的利益相關者，參與制定上述城鎮所面臨複雜問題之相關對策，規劃的文化持續發生變化。擴大對教育環境之理解，不僅包括學校與大學，亦包括家庭、同儕群體與社區，應該更頻繁地關切市政行動。有必要確保城市景觀與學習景觀之間具更好地連結。說明城市發展與教育政策領域及行動，於空間與內容方面皆具關聯。

因此，首先讓我們思考，城市發展與教育間之關係，其次是教育如何與城市發展產生相關性。換言之，我將區分地方學習與從地方學習。

• 地方學習

簡而言之，社區、地區與城市內的區域，建構了教育過程之基本框架。城市空間提供學習經驗。除此以外，創造城市空間是豐富學習體驗之過程，其與城市發展及城市規劃之問題具相關性。透過於城市空間裡，不同之教育環境中，整合正規及非正規教育之過程，有機會實現更好的教育。

教育對於城市內的社區，以及地區的永續與包容性發展而言非常重要。教育基礎設施可成為減少教育不平等與社會服務成本之起點。教育方面的努力可促進社會及經濟穩定，為生活品質帶來其他好處。提供優質的學校，有助於降低社會隔閡，並成為鼓勵改善社會與文化之機會。

• 繼續教育

以上部分為主要相關，但不僅涉及學校與學習場域之基礎教育。城市景觀亦包括工作場所、商業區及文化資產，而學習景觀亦需要包括這些部分。景觀愈獲得改善，需接受繼續教育、大學及高等教育，以反映提升勞動力技能與促進創新及創意產業之重要性，以確保一個充滿活力及永續發展之城市。

許多國家之教育政策，會優先考慮基礎技能與技能之提升，這是面對新產業及新技術之永續與重大挑戰，而促進終身學習與繼續教育之政策為關鍵。地方靈活性與對「地方」的清楚認識，招募與培訓是提升學習參與度之關鍵，使學習者得以克服獲得服務之實際問題。政府部門在確定適當之學習場所（線上學習對許多人而言吸引力是不足的），以及提供交通方面之安排，皆發揮著關鍵作用。城市規劃者需於城市景觀中增加這些功能。

以地方教育政策為基礎，可透過支持在職技能之發展、與雇主合作以確認技能之要求，並協調適當之規定，以及可透過地方與區域計劃，以解決與彌補其差距，並支持工作技能之發展。透過激勵新雇主與雇主投資，是協調及提升地方技能發展之戰略。

但是，儘管技能對支持地方經濟與個人職業發展至關重要，但於其他重要領域，社區教育對於實現城鎮之政策目標亦是不可或缺的。並非每個人皆能參與工作與培訓，原因有很多，例如：健康及心理健康不佳、貧困與貧窮。對個人與群體的支持是至關重要的，獲得識字及計算方面之基礎教育，為參與社會生活、獲得服務及工作機會，提供了潛在之途徑。社區教育是教育政策中重要之構成要素，但往往取得較低的優先權，且關鍵取決於地方之方法。

• 從地方學習：教育作為政策學習的一部分

除了上述之挑戰，城市現在亦面臨著幾項重大挑戰。對許多人而言，最緊迫的是管理新冠疫情大流行後的恢復、應對氣候變化與實現零碳排放目標，以及最大限度地提升數位技術與人工智慧，於城市管理及發展中之價值。

實現零碳城市之挑戰取決於一系列的戰略決策，包括建築標準、廢棄物處理、減少交通量，以及提升主動旅行（步行與騎自行車）與大眾運輸等。這些皆具潛在之爭議，不僅需重新塑造城市街道與景觀，亦需確保居民與雇主之行為改變。需進行社區教育，以傳達政策所依據之科學及原理，並確保社區的支持及參與。傾聽當地社區的聲音，對於政策創新以適應當地環境非常重要。正如倫敦經濟學院近期發表的一篇博客文章所提到：「事實不會改變觀點，社會網絡、群體對話，故事才會改變。」

同樣地，城市需制定適當之戰略，以因應新冠疫情大流行後之恢復。例如，新冠疫情引起了關於工作場所規模與定位之爭議，並影響住房市場之需求。由於封鎖的結果，人們更習慣於當地社區生活，而振興當地社區之辯論正在進行中，其關於服務、商業，以及文化措施權力下放與在地化。人們日漸意識到綠色空間，以及對當地自然資源利用之重要性。旅行模式正在改變。地方需被重新思考，而社區之投入，對於市政學習與政策制定亦至關重要。

同樣適用於公共衛生與福祉政策。將人們與社會及社區活動重新串聯起來，對個人健康與福祉而言非常重要。建設包容性社區，可涉及與支持志願行動及社區參與，以確保供應面之差距，以及弭平這些差距之新對策。

鑑於數位技術與人工智慧之快速發展，上述第三項挑戰涉及城市對於「大數據」之收集與利用。這些技術可有效地協助交通管理或大眾運輸，監測城市績效及評估政策效果。數據系統可辨識行為及ㄧ般社會條件之變化。城市可於內部使用數據，亦可作為開放性數據資源，涵蓋與上述核心問題相關之人口普查數據及證據。開放性方法可促進許多機構，運用相同之數據庫，並開展行動。

智能數據系統變得越來越精密且復雜。其存在之風險，即這些系統可能是由數據專家所驅動，而非以城市期望面之政策問題為基礎。需持續地進行組織學習，以確保合法且道德之數據收集，以及出於政策目的對結果分析具有效解釋。

於日益數位化的世界中，應採取措施以確保常住人口數位公平是非常重要的。數位公平之限制，包括可負擔性、數位素養及消費者體驗。城市可制定戰略以解決這些限制，包括安裝公共Wi-Fi及改善設備之使用、數位的培訓及清晰的資訊。透過這種方式，可使民眾從可靠之資訊中，參與政策討論。

• 結論

本文的討論是將城市景觀與城鎮的學習景觀相匹配，以實現城市規劃與有效學習之互利互惠。若城市規劃者與教育專家，能好好理解彼此，可為彼此做出之貢獻，這將得以實現。對於城市規劃者而言，其應表明城市景觀需提供足夠之學校名額，以及有能力提供適當技能基礎的大學。學習過程中的環境，是城市景觀重要的一部分。學習環境包括各種學習過程。對於教育工作者而言，學習政策與實踐，應尋求影響城市景觀之形式。超越正式培訓與技能之學習，接受社區教育與持續學習，可提升社會文化及生活之品質、城市永續發展之經濟基礎，以及政策制定之有效性。這對於實現城市面臨全球挑戰之可行性，至關重要。需瞭解問題與解決方案，因地而異。

應對這些挑戰，需重新學習規劃教育政策與其提供之多元傳統模式。學習機會之空間層面，需得到承認，而學習對土地使用與社會規劃之影響，亦是如此。

👍原文網址：請點選

🌎More than schools and skills – learning as part of urban planning

Noting the increasing numbers of cities worldwide who have successfully sought membership of the UNESCO Global Network of Learning Cities I tried in my last essay to draw out the importance of policies for lifelong learning for the development of places and in the renewed urgency of re-thinking ways in which cities provide for their citizens following the challenges to previous norms arising from the Covid pandemic.

Here I will return to the theme of policies for education and learning in city development. I will argue that recent educational policy which, as Hager has argued has in recent decades emphasized what he calls the ‘economic turn’, has not been as helpful as it might have been for the formulation of policies for places, and that both education policy and policies for urban development will benefit from a broader shared understanding of what is meant by learning and its implementation. If the aim of municipal policymaking is to achieve an integrated urban development strategy which, alongside conventional spatial aspects such as transport, environment, housing, and economic development, it must include education.

Experience would suggest that current urban planning does not often seem to connect understandings in education within the knowledge domain in spatial and planning knowledge. For example, an analysis of the knowledge domain of urban planning academics in the US (see Sanchez and Afzalan, 2020) fails to mention education in their topics of interest, although it does include other social policy issues such as health and inequality.

Urban planning gives shape and structure to cities and towns. It is focused on the arrangement and design of buildings, transport systems, public spaces and social and cultural amenities. It has to do with creating conditions for economic development and with the increasing consequences of climate change and environmental carbon emissions. It is about promoting economic wellbeing, livability, and health and safety for residents.

The culture of planning has been changing in recent decades as more and more stakeholders are drawn into formulating responses to the complex issues faced by towns and cities indicated above. Extending the understanding of settings in which education takes place to  include not only in schools and colleges but also in families, peer groups and neighbourhoods should more often inform municipal actions. There is a need to ensure a better overlap between the urban landscape and what might be called the learning landscape. demonstrating that the policy areas and actions in urban development and education overlap both spatially and in content.

So let us consider how first, urban development is relevant to education, and second how education is relevant to urban development.  In short I will draw a distinction between learning in places and learning from places.

• Learning in places

Put simply, neighbourhoods, districts and areas within cities form the basic framework of and for educational processes. Urban space provides learning experience. Furthermore, the processes of creating urban space as a rich and varied learning experience are related to questions of urban development and urban planning. Better education is likely to be achieved by incorporating formal and informal education processes in different educational settings in the urban space.

Education is important for a sustainable and inclusive development of neighbourhoods and districts within cities. Educational infrastructure can be a starting point for reducing educational inequalities and costs of social services. Efforts in education can contribute to social and economic stability bringing other benefits to quality of life. Provision of well-located good quality schools can help reduce social segregation and encourage improvement in social and cultural opportunities.

• Continuing education

The section above relates primarily but not only to basic initial education in schools and elsewhere in the learning landscape.  The urban landscape also includes workplaces, commercial areas and cultural assets, and the learning landscape needs to embrace those too. The landscape needs to be enhanced to embrace continuing education post-school, in college and higher education and in work to reflect too the importance of upskilling the workforce, facilitating innovation and creative industries to ensure a vibrant and sustainable urban community.

Education policy in many countries prioritizes basic skills and upskilling, a continuing and  a major challenge in the face of new industries and technologies Policies for the promotion of lifelong learning and continuing education are key. Local flexibility, and a clear understanding of ‘place’ are key to improving engagement, recruitment and training of learners, and overcoming practical issues of accessing provision.  Municipalities have a crucial role in locating appropriate places for learning (on-line learning is not attractive to many), and transport arrangements for accessing learning opportunities. Urban planners need to add such features to the urban landscape.

Place-based educational policies can support the development of in-work skills by working with employers to map skill requirements and co-ordinate appropriate provision and addressing gaps that can be met through local and regional programming.  Incentivizing new employers and investment by employers is strengthened by a coordinated local skills development strategy.

But vital though skills are to supporting the local economy and for individual career progression there are other important areas where community education is essential for the delivery of policy objectives in towns and cities.  Not everyone is able to participate in work and training for a variety of reasons, such as poor health and mental health and deprivation and poverty.  Support for individuals and groups is vital, and access to basic education in literacy and computing offer a potential path to participation in social life, accessing services and work opportunities.. Community education is an important component in educational policies, but often receives lower priority, and depend crucially on a place-based approach.

• Learning from places: education as part of policy learning

Cities just now are facing several major challenges beyond those outlined above. The most pressing for many are managing the recovery from the COVID pandemic, responding to climate change and reaching zero carbon emission targets, and maximizing value from digital technology and artificial intelligence in city management and development.

The challenge of delivering a zero carbon city depends on a series of strategic decisions on issues such as building standards, waste disposal, traffic reduction and increasing active travel and pubic transportation.  All of these are potentially contentious and require not only re-shaping city streets and landscapes but also securing behavioral changes on the part of residents and employers. Community education is required to communicate the science and rationale on which policies are based and to secure community support and participation. Listening to Local communities will be important in fitting policy innovation to local contexts. As a recent blog post from LSE put it ‘facts don’t change opinion, social networks, group dialogue and stories do’.

Similarly cities have to work out appropriate strategies for recovery following the pandemic. This has created debate for example, about the size and location of workplaces and influenced demand within the housing market. As a consequence of lockdown people became used to living their lives in more local neighbourhoods, and debates are taking place about the re-vitalization of local communities, about decentralization and localization of services and commercial and cultural facilities. There is an increased awareness of the importance of green space, and access to local natural resources. Travel patterns are changing. Place has to be re-thought, and again community input is vital for municipal learning and policymaking.

The same applies to policies on public health and wellbeing. Re-connecting people to social and community activities is important for individual health and wellbeing. Building inclusive communities is likely to involve support for voluntary action and community involvement in identifying gaps in provision and novel responses to filling them.

The third challenge identified above relates to cities’ collection and utilization of ‘big data’ in the light of rapidly expanding digital technologies and artificial intelligence. Such technologies can assist in such matters as efficient traffic management or public transportation, to the monitoring of city performance and  evaluating policy effects. Data systems can identify changes in behaviour and to general social conditions. Cities can use data internally, or as an open data resource spanning census data and evidence relating to core issues such as those identified above. An open approach can facilitate multi-agency working from a common database.

Smart data systems are becoming ever more sophisticated and complex. There is a risk that these systems can be driven by data specialists rather than based on the policy issues cities would wish to confront. There is a need for continuing organizational learning to ensure legitimate and ethical data collection, and valid interpretation of resulting analysis for policy purposes.

Steps to ensure digital equity amongst the resident population are important in an increasingly digitized world. Obstacles to digital equity can include affordability, digital literacy and consumer experience.  Cities can develop strategies to tackle such constraints including installing public wi-fi and improving access to devices, digital training and clear information. In this way a more informed populous is able to participate in policy discussion from a firm information base.

• Conclusion

The discussion in this essay has been about matching up the urban landscape with the learning landscape in towns and cities to the mutual benefit of both city planning and effective learning.  This will be achieved if urban planners and education professionals better understand the contribution each can make to the other.  For city planners, it should indicate that the urban landscape needs to deliver more than sufficient school places and colleges with capacity to deliver an appropriate skills base.  The urban landscape is an essential part of the context in which learning processes occur. The learning landscape embraces learning processes of all kinds.  For educationalists, learning policies and practices should seek to influence the form of the urban landscape.  Learning beyond formal qualifications and skills, embracing community education and continuing learning  enhances the quality of social and cultural life, the economic base for city sustainability and the effectiveness of policymaking. It is essential for the feasibility of delivery on global challenges cities face. Issues and solutions look different from place to place, and that needs to be understood.

Responses to these challenges faced will require re-learning many of the traditional approaches of both planning and education policies and provision.  The spatial dimensions of learning opportunities need recognition, as do learning effects on land use and social planning.