Please wait a minute...
 首页  期刊介绍 期刊订阅 联系我们 横山亮次奖 百年刊庆
 
最新录用  |  预出版  |  当期目录  |  过刊浏览  |  阅读排行  |  下载排行  |  引用排行  |  横山亮次奖  |  百年刊庆
清华大学学报(自然科学版)  2023, Vol. 63 Issue (2): 210-222    DOI: 10.16511/j.cnki.qhdxxb.2022.22.047
  建设管理 本期目录 | 过刊浏览 | 高级检索 |
基于综合效益量化的综合管廊投资决策与成本回收机制
曾国华1, 汤志立1, 徐千军2
1. 北京京投城市管廊投资有限公司, 北京 100027;
2. 清华大学 水沙科学与水利水电工程国家重点实验室, 北京 100084
Investment decision-making and cost recovery mechanisms of utility tunnels based on comprehensive benefit quantification
ZENG Guohua1, TANG Zhili1, XU Qianjun2
1. Beijing Jingtou Urban Utility Tunnel Investment Co., Ltd., Beijing 100027, China;
2. State Key Laboratory of Hydroscience and Engineering, Tsinghua University, Beijing 100084, China
全文: PDF(10324 KB)  
输出: BibTeX | EndNote (RIS)      
摘要 城市综合管廊综合效益显著,是推动城市现代化、科技化、集约化、韧性化的重要举措,但投资决策约束条件及公平合理的成本回收机制的缺失严重制约了综合管廊的可持续发展。该文分析了综合管廊全生命周期综合成本、综合效益的组成及影响因素,提出了以“综合效益与综合成本比大于1”为首要约束条件的投资决策模型。构建了2种综合管廊成本回收机制,即“比例付费机制”(管线单位和政府按综合管廊内外部效益比例付费的成本回收机制)和“缺口补助机制”(管线单位按综合管廊的内部效益付费、政府对缺口资金进行补助的成本回收机制)。系统量化了19个综合管廊项目的综合成本效益关系,综合效益与综合成本比集中在1.50~3.58之间,显示了显著的综合效益。采用“比例付费机制”,考虑长期内部效益时政府分摊比例平均值为52.3%,考虑短期内部效益时为67.2%,而采用“缺口补助机制”,考虑短期内部效益时政府分摊比例平均值为51.3%。考虑入廊时序影响时,当期入廊率每降低30%,采用“缺口补助机制”的政府费用分摊比例均值平均增加8.8%(考虑短期内部效益)。提出了因时、因地制宜的“两步走”实施综合管廊费用分摊有关政策建议,即综合管廊发展初期按照考虑短期内部效益的“缺口补助机制”进行费用分摊,发展成熟期按照考虑长期内部效益的“比例付费机制”。提出了完善综合管廊投资决策配套机制、完善入廊收费使用制度、强化投资建设“开源节流”(成立区域平台公司、探索市场化试点等)的综合管廊可持续发展建议。
服务
把本文推荐给朋友
加入引用管理器
E-mail Alert
RSS
作者相关文章
曾国华
汤志立
徐千军
关键词 综合管廊综合效益量化投资决策模型入廊率成本回收机制    
Abstract:[Objective] Urban utility tunnels can provide great benefits promoting urban modernization, technologies, intensification and resilience. However, the lack of investment decision-making constraints and fair and reasonable cost recovery mechanisms limits the sustainable development of utility tunnels. [Methods] This study analyzes the comprehensive costs and benefits over the entire utility tunnel life cycle with emphasis on the four categories that most affect investment decisions, namely, the government financial resources and government foresight, the comprehensive characteristics of the construction area, the specification and sequence of pipelines entering the utility tunnel, and the planning, construction and operation level. [Results] The utility tunnel investment decision-making model has a primary constraint condition for investment decision-making that the project must have a benefit to cost ratio greater than 1. Two kinds of cost recovery mechanisms are defined as the “proportional payment mechanism” (cost recovery mechanism for pipeline units and for the government to pay in proportion to internal and external benefits) and the “gap subsidy mechanism” (cost recovery mechanism for pipeline units to pay according to the internal benefits and for the government to subsidy the gap funds). The 19 utility tunnel projects have benefit to cost ratios concentrated between 1.50 and 3.58, reflecting significant benefits. The “proportional payment mechanism” gives an average government share of 52.3% when considering long-term internal benefits and 67.2% when considering short-term internal benefits. The “gap subsidy mechanism” that focuses on short-term internal benefits gives the average government share of 51.3%. The cost recovery mechanism based on the government gap subsidies considering short-term internal benefits shows that every 30% decrease in the entry rate during the current period increases the average government apportionment ratio by 8.8% on average. [Conclusions] A “two-step” implementation of the utility tunnel cost sharing policy is then developed based on the local, temporal conditions. At the initial stage of utility tunnel development, the cost is shared according to the government “gap subsidy mechanism” considering the short-term internal benefits, and at the mature stage of utility tunnel development, the “proportional payment mechanism” considering the long-term internal benefits is adopted. Finally, utility tunnel sustainable development suggestion is presented to improve the investment decision-making mechanism, to improve the entry fee and use system, and to strengthen the open source model to reduce expenditures during investment and construction by establishing regional platform companies, exploring market-oriented pilots, and other methods.
Key wordsutility tunnels    comprehensive benefits    quantification    investment decision-making model    entry rate    cost recovery mechanism
收稿日期: 2022-06-01      出版日期: 2023-01-14
引用本文:   
曾国华, 汤志立, 徐千军. 基于综合效益量化的综合管廊投资决策与成本回收机制[J]. 清华大学学报(自然科学版), 2023, 63(2): 210-222.
ZENG Guohua, TANG Zhili, XU Qianjun. Investment decision-making and cost recovery mechanisms of utility tunnels based on comprehensive benefit quantification. Journal of Tsinghua University(Science and Technology), 2023, 63(2): 210-222.
链接本文:  
http://jst.tsinghuajournals.com/CN/10.16511/j.cnki.qhdxxb.2022.22.047  或          http://jst.tsinghuajournals.com/CN/Y2023/V63/I2/210
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
[1] 赵国富, 王守清. 城市地下综合管廊PPP项目回报结构案例研究[J].清华大学学报(自然科学版), 2022, 62(2): 250-258. ZHAO G F, WANG S Q. Case studies of the return structure of urban underground comprehensive pipeline gallery PPP projects[J] Journal of Tsinghua University (Science and Technology), 2022, 62(2): 250-258. (in Chinese)
[2] CANO-HURTADO J J, CANTO-PERELLO J. Sustainable development of urban underground space for utilities[J]. Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology, 1999, 14(3): 335-340.
[3] HUNT D V L, NASH D, ROGERS C D F. Sustainable utility placement via multi-utility tunnels[J]. Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology, 2014, 39: 15-26.
[4] 鲍宗辉, 付素娟, 张慧, 等. 地下综合管廊综合效益货币化评价研究[C]//中国土木工程学会2019年学术年会论文集. 上海: 中国建筑工业出版社, 2019: 119-129. BAO Z H, FU S J, ZHANG H, et al. Research on monetary valuation of comprehensive benefits for utility tunnel[C]//Proceedings of 2019 Academic Annual Meeting of China Society of Civil Engineering. Shanghai: China Architecture & Building Press, 2019: 119-129. (in Chinese)
[5] 聂永平, 杨文贵, 丁志斌, 等. 共同沟的成本分析与研究[J]. 地下空间, 2004, 24(3): 377-379. NIE Y P, YANG W G, DING Z B, et al. Study and analysis on the cost of utility tunnel[J]. Underground Space, 2004, 24(3): 377-379. (in Chinese)
[6] 郭莹, 祝文君, 杨军. 市政综合廊道费用-效益分析方法和实例研究[J]. 地下空间与工程学报, 2006, 2(S1): 1236-1239. GUO Y, ZHU W J, YANG J. Method and case study on the cost-benefit analysis of urban multi-purpose utility tunnel[J]. Chinese Journal of Underground Space and Engineering, 2006, 2(S1): 1236-1239. (in Chinese)
[7] 张月, 杨艺鑫, 王长祥. 厦门市综合管廊全生命周期规划设计技术对管廊建设综合效益的影响[J]. 给水排水, 2020, 56(S1): 933-937, 941. ZHANG Y, YANG Y X, WANG C X. The influence of full life cycle planning and design technology on comprehensive benefits of utility tunnel in Xiamen[J]. Water & Wastewater Engineering, 2020, 56(S1): 933-937, 941. (in Chinese)
[8] 许云骅, 李静, 王家华, 等. N市综合管廊社会及经济效益评估[J]. 中国市政工程, 2021(1): 62-65. XU Y H, LI J, WANG J H, et al. Social and economic benefits evaluation of utility tunnel in N city[J]. China Municipal Engineering, 2021(1): 62-65. (in Chinese)
[9] 田强, 薛国州, 田建波, 等. 城市地下综合管廊经济效益研究[J]. 地下空间与工程学报, 2015, 11(S2): 373-377. TIAN Q, XUE G Z, TIAN J B, et al. Economic benefits research of urban utility tunnel[J]. Chinese Journal of Underground Space and Engineering, 2015, 11(S2): 373-377. (in Chinese)
[10] 李俊峰, 邱实, 魏中华. 考虑交通成本的综合管廊建设效益模型研究[J]. 中国工程咨询, 2018(5): 77-84. LI J F, QIU S, WEI Z H. Study on benefit model of utility tunnel construction considering traffic cost[J]. Chinese Consulting Engineers, 2018(5): 77-84. (in Chinese)
[11] 关欣. 综合管廊与传统管线辅设的经济比较: 以中关村西区综合管廊为例[J]. 建筑经济, 2009(S1): 339-342. GUAN X. Cost comparison of pipeline utility-tunnel with traditional tube-based pipeline: Taking the pipeline utility-tunnel of west zone of Zhongguancun for the example[J]. Construction Economy, 2009(S1): 339-342. (in Chinese)
[12] ZHANG Z Y, PENG F L, MA C X, et al. External benefit assessment of urban utility tunnels based on sustainable development[J]. Sustainability, 2021, 13(2): 900.
[13] ALAGHBANDRAD A, HAMMAD A. Framework for multi-purpose utility tunnel lifecycle cost assessment and cost-sharing[J]. Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology, 2020, 104: 103528.
[14] 孙云章. 城市地下管线综合管廊项目建设中的决策支持研究[D]. 上海: 上海交通大学, 2008. SUN Y Z. The research of decision-making support of the underground pipeline colligate alure to be building in city[D]. Shanghai: Shanghai Jiao Tong University, 2008. (in Chinese)
[15] 陈静. 城市基础性项目投资决策研究: 以某市地下综合管廊项目为例[D]. 西安: 长安大学, 2018. CHEN J. Study on investment decision of urban basic project: Take the underground utility tunnel engineering in a city as an example[D]. Xi'an: Chang'an University, 2018. (in Chinese)
[16] 张婧, 张欣慧. 政府管理决策视角下综合管廊规划选线研究[C]// 2017中国城市规划年会论文集(03城市工程规划). 东莞: 中国城市规划学会, 2017: 153-162. ZHANG J, ZHANG X H. Research on planning and route selection of utility tunnel from the perspective of government management decision-making[C]// Proceedings of 2017 China Urban Planning Annual Conference (03 Urban Engineering Planning). Dongguan: China Urban Planning Society, 2017: 153-162. (in Chinese)
[17] 周景峰. 城市地下综合管廊项目决策评估方法研究[D]. 成都: 西南交通大学, 2019. ZHOU J F. Study on decision evaluation method of urban underground comprehensive pipeline project[D]. Chengdu: Southwest Jiaotong University, 2019. (in Chinese)
[18] 吴斌, 王婧. 城市地下综合管廊规划建设的决策支持研究: 以南京河西地区为例[J]. 江苏建设, 2018(1): 45-54. WU B, WANG J. Study on decision support for planning and construction of urban underground utility tunnel: Taking Hexi area of Nanjing as an example[J]. Jiangsu Planning & Construction, 2018(1): 45-54. (in Chinese)
[19] 陈寿标. 共同沟投资模式与费用分摊研究[D]. 上海: 同济大学, 2006. CHEN S B. The research on investment mode and fare apportion of utility tunnel[D]. Shanghai: Tongji University, 2006. (in Chinese)
[20] 潘梁. 地下综合管廊全生命周期成本构成及分摊[J]. 城乡建设, 2018(11): 46-48. PAN L. The whole life cycle cost composition and apportionment of underground utility tunnel[J]. Urban and Rural Development, 2018(11): 46-48. (in Chinese)
[21] 高小强. 北京通州综合管廊智慧运营与安全管理研究[D]. 北京: 中国矿业大学(北京), 2019. GAO X Q. Wisedom operantion and safety management study on Beijing Tongzhou utility tunnel[D]. Beijing: China University of Mining and Technology (Beijing), 2019. (in Chinese)
[22] 陈雍君, 宁楠, 汪雯娟, 等. 地下综合管廊入廊收费定价模式研究[J]. 建筑经济, 2017, 38(9): 23-28. CHEN Y J, NING N, WANG W J, et al. Research on the pricing model of tunnel entrance fee in underground utility tunnel[J]. Construction Economy, 2017, 38(9): 23-28. (in Chinese)
[23] 张悠. 基于支持向量机的综合管廊工程造价估算模型研究[D]. 西安: 西安建筑科技大学, 2018. ZHANG Y. Research on the cost estimation model of the utility tunnel based on support vector machine[D]. Xi'an: Xi'an University of Architecture and Technology, 2018. (in Chinese)
[24] 蔡孟龙. 基于GA-BP神经网络的综合管廊投资估算方法研究[D]. 长沙: 长沙理工大学, 2020. CAI M L. Research on the investment estimation method of utility tunnel based on GA-BP neural network[D]. Changsha: Changsha University of Science & Technology, 2020. (in Chinese)
[25] 钟晖, 吴景福, 黄涛, 等. 青岛市地下综合管廊建设期成本控制研究[J]. 工程经济, 2019, 29(7): 8-11. ZHONG H, WU J F, HUANG T, et al. Research on cost control of underground utility tunnel construction period in Qingdao[J]. Engineering Economy, 2019, 29(7): 8-11. (in Chinese)
[26] 董爱华. 地下综合管廊成本影响因素与控制对策[J]. 中小企业管理与科技, 2021(4): 100-102. DONG A H. Influencing factors and control measures of underground utility tunnel cost[J]. Management & Technology of SME, 2021(4): 100-102. (in Chinese)
[27] 高韵蕊. 城市地下综合管廊建设投资及运营成本的研究[J]. 工程经济, 2021, 31(5): 11-14. GAO Y R. Study on the investment and operation cost of urban utility tunnel[J]. Engineering Economy, 2021, 31(5): 11-14. (in Chinese)
[28] CANTO-PERELLO J, CURIEL-ESPARZA J. Assessing governance issues of urban utility tunnels[J]. Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology, 2013, 33: 82-87.
[29] 韩畅, 姚艳, 任娇蓉, 等. 考虑多元主体利益均衡的电力管线入廊费用分摊方法[J]. 电力系统自动化, 2020, 44(2): 147-155. HAN C, YAO Y, REN J R, et al. Cost sharing method for power pipelines entering into utility tunnels considering interest balancing of plural subjects[J]. Automation of Electric Power Systems, 2020, 44(2): 147-155. (in Chinese)
[30] 乔柱, 刘伊生, 张宏, 等. 综合管廊有偿使用的收费定价研究[J]. 地下空间与工程学报, 2018, 14(2): 306-314. QIAO Z, LIU Y S, ZHANG H, et al. Charge pricing research on paid-use of comprehensive utility tunnel[J] Chinese Journal of Underground Space and Engineering, 2018, 14(2): 306-314. (in Chinese)
[31] 牛格图, 段子靖, 李孝林, 等. 输配电价改革背景下蒙西地区城市综合管廊投资分析[J]. 内蒙古电力技术, 2020, 38(2): 13-17. NIU G T, DUAN Z J, LI X L, et al. Analysis of investment of urban utility tunnel in west Inner Mongolia based on transmission and distribution price reform[J]. Inner Mongolia Electric Power, 2020, 38(2): 13-17. (in Chinese)
[32] 马鑫. 综合管廊入廊收费问题及对策[J]. 综合运输, 2021, 43(4): 113-116. MA X. On the problems and countermeasures of utility tunnel entrance fee[J]. China Transportation Review, 2021, 43(4): 113-116. (in Chinese)
[33] 孟肖旭. 地下综合管廊项目费用分摊问题研究[D]. 青岛: 青岛理工大学, 2016. MENG X X. Study on the cost sharing of the underground integrated pipe gallery[D]. Qingdao: Qingdao University of Technology, 2016. (in Chinese)
[34] 郝伟亚, 丁慧平. 城市轨道交通PPP项目权益资本结构研究: 市场化准量模型分析[J]. 北京交通大学学报(社会科学版), 2021, 20(1): 65-75. HAO W Y, DING H P. On equity capital structure of PPP proj ect in urban rail transit: Based on the marketization proportion model[J]. Journal of Beijing Jiaotong University (Social Sciences Edition), 2021, 20(1): 65-75. (in Chinese)
[35] 马鑫, 张娜. 综合管廊日常维护费分摊模型及其适用性研究[J]. 综合运输, 2021, 43(5): 80-84. MA X, ZHANG N. Study on allocation model and applicability of daily maintenance cost for utility tunnel[J]. China Tran- sportation Review, 2021, 43(5): 80-84. (in Chinese)
[36] ZHANG Z, REN J R, XIAO K C, et al. Cost allocation mechanism design for urban utility tunnel construction based on cooperative game and resource dependence theory[J]. Energies, 2019, 12(17): 3309.
[37] 荆伟, 张林林, 杨超, 等. 综合管廊入廊费测算模型研究[J]. 工程经济, 2019, 29(8): 12-16. JING W, ZHANG L L, YANG C, et al. Research on evaluation model of entry fee of utility tunnel[J]. Engineering Economy, 2019, 29(8): 12-16. (in Chinese)
[38] 中国岩石力学与工程学会地下空间分会, 南京慧龙城市规划设计有限公司. 中国城市地下空间发展蓝皮书2019[R/OL]. (2019-10)[2022-05-22]. http://www.csrme.com/Home/Content/show/id/979.do. Underground Space Branch of Chinese Society of Rock Mechanics and Engineering, Nanjing Huilong Urban Planning and Design Co., Ltd. Blue book on the development of urban underground space in China, 2019[R/OL]. (2019-10)[2022-05-22]. http://www.csrme.com/Home/Content/show/id/979.do. (in Chinese)
[39] 王柏峰. 地下综合管廊PPP项目定价和调价机制研究[D]. 武汉: 武汉理工大学, 2018. WANG B F. Study on pricing and price adjustment mechanism of urban untility tunnel use PPP mode[D] Wuhan: Wuhan University of Technology, 2018. (in Chinese)
[1] 蔡鲲鹏, 臧晓蓓, 陈升山, 郭飞. 推进剂管路系统深低温垫片密封性能数值分析[J]. 清华大学学报(自然科学版), 2024, 64(3): 578-590.
[2] 吴建松, 蔡继涛, 赵亦孟, 操阅, 周睿, 庞磊. 城市综合管廊燃气爆炸传播特性实验研究[J]. 清华大学学报(自然科学版), 2022, 62(6): 987-993.
[3] 赵国富, 王守清. 城市地下综合管廊PPP项目回报结构案例研究[J]. 清华大学学报(自然科学版), 2022, 62(2): 250-258.
[4] 彭发忠,王传英,柴恒辉,邵珠峰,王帅奇,王博文. 基于分层结构的伺服压力机滑块轻量化设计[J]. 清华大学学报(自然科学版), 2020, 60(12): 1016-1022.
[5] 刘强, 张建平, 胡振中. 基于键-值缓存的IFC模型Web应用技术[J]. 清华大学学报(自然科学版), 2016, 56(4): 348-353,359.
[6] 吕艳丽, 李元龙, 向爽, 夏春和. 基于服务相关性的应用层安全事件危害评估方法[J]. 清华大学学报(自然科学版), 2016, 56(1): 35-41.
[7] 徐敬德, 崔慧娟, 唐昆. 结合信源和信道的多级矢量量化联合优化算法[J]. 清华大学学报(自然科学版), 2015, 55(8): 826-830.
[8] 李小冬,苏舒,黄天健. 施工粉尘健康损害量化评价[J]. 清华大学学报(自然科学版), 2015, 55(1): 50-55.
[9] 朱涵钰, 吴联仁, 吕廷杰. 社交网络用户隐私量化研究: 建模与实证分析[J]. 清华大学学报(自然科学版), 2014, 54(3): 402-406.
Viewed
Full text


Abstract

Cited

  Shared   
  Discussed   
版权所有 © 《清华大学学报(自然科学版)》编辑部
本系统由北京玛格泰克科技发展有限公司设计开发 技术支持:support@magtech.com.cn