Abstract：
Three paradigms to deal with urban water issues are compared. The analysis focuses on their definition and objectives, the role of different stakeholders, the issues they deal with, and the possible solutions suggested. The paradigms differ in scope (from the narrow focus of the sponge city paradigm to the broad goals of eco-city paradigm) and in terms of the governance structures used to coordinate different stakeholders. The smart and sponge paradigms mainly use existing government structures. In the eco-cities approach, the citizens want to be involved through newly created governance structures. Smart and eco-city initiatives emphasize the involvement of stakeholders, while in the sponge cities approach, the initiative is often taken by the local government. Finally, in terms of expected solutions, the paradigms want to create eco- or healthy cities or improve water management to create a more healthy urban environment. After identifying the issue, alternative water-related technologies are available, like generating energy from wastewater or separating grey and brown water. Cities require different governance structures, and managing information flows in an integrated way to solve water and other issues. The experience in Europe, China, and India may help other cities choose the right paradigm.
摘要：
比较了三种处理城市水问题的范式。分析的重点是它们的定义和目标，不同利益相关者的作用，他们处理的问题，以及可能的解决方案。范式的范围不同（从海绵城市范式的狭窄重点到生态城市范式的广泛目标），以及用于协调不同利益相关者的治理结构。智能和海绵范式主要使用现有的政府结构。在生态城市方法中，公民希望通过新建立的治理结构参与进来。智慧和生态城市倡议强调利益相关者的参与，而在海绵城市的方法中，这项倡议通常由当地政府采取。最后,就预期的解决方案而言，范式希望创建生态或健康的城市或改善水管理，以创造更健康的城市环境。确定问题后，替代水相关技术可用，比如从废水中产生能量或分离灰色和棕色的水。城市需要不同的治理结构，并以综合方式管理信息流，以解决水和其他问题。欧洲的经验,中国,印度可能会帮助其他城市选择正确的模式。
