1 Introduction

The "Instructions on Establishing the Spatial Planning System and Supervising its Implementation" (hereinafter referred to as the "Instructions") by the Central Committee of the CPC and the State Council of China is of great and far-reaching significance, marking that the general framework of the "Spatial planning System" that integrates the existing Major Functional Zoning Plan, Land Use Plan, Urban and Rural Planning, etc. has been established. This is a major reform progress and an innovative system construction.

The construction of a unified spatial planning system can be regarded as a new chapter in the history of China’s spatial planning. Prior to this, China has successively formed various types of spatial relevant planning, they have played active roles in serving China’s economic and social development as well as urbanization course, and promoting the rational land use and protecting natural resources practically since China adopted reform and opening up policy. At the same time, as pointed out in "Instructions," there were shortcomings in past such as excessive planning types, overlapping or conflicting contents, and frequent decision changes, etc. (Fig. 1). To overcome these problems, the keys is to hold the concept of ecological civilization and practice in scientific approach on development, and eliminate the institutional and mechanism defects. Since the 18th National Congress of the CPC, the central authority has been promoting reforms in those concerns(Lin, Wu, Wu, & Liu, 2018; Zhao, 2018).

Fig. 1
figure 1

Main types of spatial planning in China in the past. Source: Pan and Zhao (2019)

Full size image

There are many kinds of spatial planning that take land resources as the basic object at home and abroad, such as territorial planning, regional planning, urban and rural planning, urban cluster planning, metropolitan planning, and nature reserve planning, etc. Horizontally, these planning involve the functions of multiple government ministries and commissions; vertically, they are divided into multiple levels including the state, province, prefecture and city, county, town and township as in China. Under this circumstance, to construct a unified spatial planning framework, it is necessary to straighten out the relationship between various planning in the first place.

According to international experience, there are two patterns of spatial planning system: one is the simultaneous existence of multiple types of spatial planning under a unified framework; the other is the integration of multiple plannings. "Pattern one is a coordination strategy worked out on the basis of retaining the existing departmental planning functions, which is relatively mild, gradual and structural; while pattern two is a radical reform of the planning formulation based on the integration of departmental responsibilities, which is relatively revolutionary, thorough and substantial" (Luo & Song, 2018). After several years of pilot practice, China has chosen the pattern of "multi-planning integration", that is, integrating China's unique Major Functional Zoning Planning with the Land Use Planning, Urban and Rural Planning, etc. into a unified "Spatial Planning", while the "Spatial planning System" is composed of "five levels and three categories" plannings, including Comprehensive Spatial planning at the national, provincial, municipal, county and township levels, Detailed Planning (regulatory planning) at the municipal and county levels and below, and Special or Sector Planning related to the use of land resources. Besides, the new planning system also includes the planning making and approval system, implementation supervision system, law and policy system, and technical standard system (Central Committee of the CPC, State Council, 2019) (Fig. 2).

Fig. 2
figure 2

Schematic diagram of the formulation and operation system of territorial spatial planning. Source: Pan and Zhao (2019)

Full size image

After the central government made the decision and issued the "Instructions" to formulate and implement spatial planning, the Ministry of Natural Resources and local governments at all levels have quickly initiated the formulation of general planning at the national and local administrative levels. This is a huge and systematic project, and there are still many issues need to be solved. Therefore, it is necessary to probe into the theoretical and technical fields of the new planning system while carrying out the professional work. This article analyzes the construction logic of China’s Spatial planning System from the historical dimension and discusses some related implementation concepts and strategies.

2 Formation and evolution of China’s spatial planning

2.1 Re-examination from China’s planned economy era to the early years of reform and opening up

The urban planning of the People’s Republic of China started in the era of planned economy, with a weak foundation. Early planning was mainly a tool to support the country’s capital construction, focusing on physical planning and design. Take the Urban Master Planning Schemes of the eight cities of Baotou, Taiyuan, Luoyang, Xi’an, Lanzhou, Wuhan, Chengdu and Datong in the 1950s as examples, at that time, the urban planning in these cities was mainly to carry out the site selection and serve the construction tasks of the 156 key industrial projects assisted by the former Soviet Union and others’ during the "First Five-Year Plan" period (Li, 2017). The urban land use in that time, involving site selection and land acquisition, was subject to the procedures of the capital investment plan. There were clear regulations on this issue in the Measures for Land Acquisition by the State for Construction issued by the State Council in January 1958. In the era of planned economy, urban planning and land management were essentially the continuation and materialization of national economic planning; urban planning could be on a roller coaster due to the ups and downs of economic growth. There was "rapid planning" like the pursuit of the "Great Leap Forward," and there were also regressions such as the decision of "no planning for three years" and the abolition of the urban planning discipline in tertiary education (Li, 2012; Zhao, 2004). As the scientific nature of urban development and planning was not respected, planning discipline and planning profession can hardly have their normal status and independence.

Since the reform and opening up in 1978, the actual needs of market-led economy development and spatial development have promoted the expansion ad legalization of urban planning. Based on the reflection of historical experience and lessons, the Minutes of the National Conference on Urban Planning in 1982 pointed out that "the long-term obsolescence of urban planning in China has caused serious consequences," "to completely reverse the situation of ‘rule by man, not by law’ that has been the case over the years, it is necessary for the state to make relevant laws to ensure the stable, continuous and effective implementation of urban planning" (Minutes of the National Conference on Urban Planning endorsed by the State Council, 1980).

2.2 Urban planning and land management in the 1980s and 1990s

In 1984, the State Council promulgated the administrative by-law City Planning Regulation, which stipulated that "urban planning is composed of two stages: general planning and detailed planning." It made clear that local government departments shall formulate urban planning, and also established a hierarchical approval system for urban planning schemes. At the same time, it created the "land use permit" and "building permit" administrative systems within the areas covered by urban planning control. In 1989, the National People’s Congress ratified the City Planning Law of the Peoples Republic of China, which was the first city planning law in the history of the People’s Republic of China. This legislation created a making and approval system for the urban general plan, detailed plan, and urban system plan; it also established a clearer and more complete system of "one notice + two permits" (that is, the agreement notice for construction location, the land use planning permit and the building planning permit). So far, city planning regulations and laws in turn have given definite administrative powers to local governments to manage their urban planning and construction matters.

Regarding the land use system, the State Council in 1982 issued a new version of Regulations on the Requisition of Land by the State for Construction, which still followed the management pattern of the planned economy era. To adapt to the new situation of reform and opening up, in 1986 the National People’s Congress created the Land Administration Law of the People’s Republic of China (and at the same time abolished the Regulations on the Requisition of Land by the State for Construction), bringing the issue of land use and protection to the level of national legislation, and the State Land Administrative Bureau was established in the same year. The law stipulated that "People’s governments at all levels shall make general land use planning. The general land use planning of local people’s governments shall be implemented upon approval by people’s governments at higher level"; "Within urban planning areas, land use shall be consistent with urban planning." besides, the law also established a system of "approval by governments at different levels according to the area size of land requisitioned," specifically, "Requisition of more than 1,000 mu of cultivated land or more than 2,000 mu of other types of land for state construction shall be subject to the approval of the State Council," and "Requisition of less than 3 mu of cultivated and less than 10 mu of other types of land shall be subject to the approval of people’s governments at the county level."

It can be seen that in the early stage of reform and opening up, land use planning, as the same as urban planning, was organized and formulated by the local governments and then reported to the higher-level governments for approval. In general speaking, the formulation and implementation of urban plan and land use planning at that time were not rigorous and strict. Urban physical development was basically dominated by the local governments; and construction land was mainly obtained through administrative allocation. In terms of land use control, the "economic planning approval- urban planning permission" pattern prevailed.

The urban planning and land management at that time served the new situation of the reform and opening-up and played an indispensable role in China’s economic rise and social development. However, the limitations of bottom-up planning and the use of land and spatial resources also became increasingly prominent, such as focusing too much on the expansion of construction area, neglecting rural development and farming land protection, etc. The control mechanism of land allocation for new construction tended to fail. Although the approval of land use was subject to quota restrictions, local governments often used methods such as "dividing large areas of land into smaller pieces" to by-pass these restrictions. It was the evidence that there were many kinds of new districts and development zones emerged in that time, with excessive occupation of cultivated land and excessive consumption of land resources, resulting in poor overall development performance.

In order to control the sprawling construction land and curb the excessive consumption of land resources, in the mid-1990s, the central government put forward the policy in terms of implementing "the most stringent cultivated land management system." The National People’s Congress therefore revised the Land Administration Law in 1998; the Ministry of Land and Resources was formed in the same year, and land management authorities were taken back to the central and provincial governments. Subsequently, major reforms in land management systems including vertical land administration below the provincial level were implemented. The new legislation stipulated that the general land use planning at the lower level shall be formulated pursuant to the general land use planning at the higher level; the local governments shall strengthen administration of land use planning, practice quantum control of construction land, as well as implement annual land supply planning.

At this point, the bottom-up "urban planning" and the top-down "land use planning" have entered a cycle of contradiction-coordination-conflict due to their different logics, administrative systems and controlling mechanisms.

2.3 Urban and rural planning legislation in the twenty-first century

After entering the twenty-first century, the central government has put forward a series of new development concepts including "coordinated urban and rural development"; in order to promote the coordination, the National People’s Congress has made substantial revisions to the existing City Planning Law of the Peoples Republic of China, thus forming the Urban and Rural Planning Law of the People’s Republic of China. The new legislation was passed in October 2007 and took effect in 2008. The Urban and Rural Planning Law created a five-level urban and rural plan making system, including the City and Town System Plan, City Plan, Town Plan, Township Plan, and Village Plan. The Urban and Rural Planning Law incorporated urban and rural planning and construction into a unified legal and administrative framework for the first time, and clarified that the written planning specified by the law have legal status. It also clarified the binding role of the "Regulatory Plan" on land use planning permission and building planning permission process. The implementation of the Urban and Rural Planning Law has played an important role in upgrading China’s urban and rural planning formulation, and in improving urban and rural land use control system.

However, since various land-use related planning was under the administration of different central ministries and commissions, there was a lack of top-level design and a delay of institutional reform. The intersections and conflicts between urban and rural planning and other departmental planning became increasingly inevitable. Although the Urban and Rural Planning Law stipulated that "the formulation of city master planning, town master planning, township planning, and village planning shall be based on national economic and social development planning and cohere with land use master planning", in fact this was difficult to put into practice.

Before the institutional reform in 2018, the Ministry of Housing and Urban–Rural Development, the former Ministry of Land and Resources and other departments with their subordinated institutions were all formulating their own planning, with divergent planning scope, planning period, and technical standards. And as a result, for the same spatial object, there were often hundreds of thousands of differences in terms of land use definition between the Urban and Rural Planning maps and the Land Use Planning maps (Wang, 2015). There were not only conflicts between Urban and Rural Planning and Land Use Planning, but also conflicts between Land Use Planning, Forest Plan and Grassland Planning, etc. (Figs. 3 and 4) Sometimes, a city might be in urgent need of development space, but had no quota for construction land; in other case, the actual construction land of a city might exceed the quota stipulated in the Land Use Planning. Therefore, the multi-administrations on spatial planning and land use control inevitably reduce administrative efficiency and affect the orderly development of the economy and society.

2.4 The origin and dilemmas of the National Major Functional Zoning Plan

With the purpose of keeping the order of spatial development and form a rational spatial structure, the Outline of the 11th Five-Year Plan for the National Economic and Social Development of the People’s Republic of China approved by the National People’s Congress in 2006 specified the task to promote the formulation of National Major Functional Zoning Plan. That is, "according to the carrying capacity of resources and environment, existing development density and development potential, taking into account the future population distribution, economic layout, land use and urbanization pattern of China, to divide China’s territorial spaces into four major functional zones: Optimizing Development Zones, Key Development Zones, Development Restricted Zones, and Development Prohibited Zones. The regional policies and performance evaluation should be made or adjusted according to the major functional orientations." Accordingly, the Major Functional Zoning Plan should be positioned as a strategic plan that incorporates "development" with "space".

In 2007, the State Council issued the "Instructions on Formulating National Major Functional Zoning Planning," stating that "National Major Functional Zoning Planning is a strategic, basic and restrictive plan. It is the basis for all kinds of planning makings that are involving spatial development and layout, including national economic and social development planning, demographic planning, regional planning, urban planning, land use planning, environmental protection planning, ecological construction planning, comprehensive river basin planning, comprehensive water resources planning, marine functional zoning, sea area use planning, food production planning, transportation planning, disaster prevention and mitigation planning, etc. According to the document of the State Council, the National Major Functional Zoning Planning is composed of the State and the Provincial Major Functional Zoning Planning, formulated at the state and provincial levels respectively.

At the end of 2010, the State Council released the National Major Functional Zoning Plan (Announcement of the State Council on Issuing the National Major Functional Zoning Plan, December 21, 2010). According to this document: "China’s territorial space is designated to the following major functional zones: according to development approach, there are Optimizing Development Zones, Key Development Zones, Development Restricted Zones, and Development Prohibited Zones; according to development content, there are Urbanization Zones, Major Agricultural Production Zones, and Key Ecological Function Zones; according to the hierarchy, there are two levels, National and Provincial ones." Concerning definition, "the term of ‘development’ in the Optimizing Development Zones, Key Development Zones, Development Restricted Zones, and Development Prohibited Zones in this plan specifically refer to large-scale and high-intensity industrialization and urbanization development." Therefore, "development restricted" specifically refers to restricting large-scale and high-intensity industrial and urban development, rather than restricting all development activities."

On the one hand, the Major Functional Zoning Plan, as a strategic, basic and restrictive plan for the spatial development of China, is undoubtedly of great meaning. On the other hand, as a new planning practice, it seems not mature enough yet. For example, how to deal with the issue of government selection versus market selection? How to define "large-scale and high-intensity industrialization and urbanization development"? The "Optimizing Development Zones" identified in the Plan, such as the "Bohai Bay Economic Rim", "Yangtze River Delta" and "Pearl River Delta", in fact still need a certain amount of large-scale and high-intensity development at this stage. From the diagrams of the Plan, the planning concept and layout seem too abstract and simplified (Figs. 5 and 6). Besides, according to the analysis of Professor Lin Jian and others, Major Functional Zoning Plan has no measures to be implemented on ground. "In terms of management and implementation methods, the Land Use Plan, and the Urban and Rural Planning are highly matured, the Forestland Protection and Utilization Plan, Water Functional Zoning, Marine Functional Zoning, etc. are also quite mature, while the Major Functional Zoning Plan and Ecological Functional Zoning do not possess clear means" (Lin et al., 2018). It reveals that in order to function as expected, the Major Functional Zoning designation most incorporation with other spatial planning.

Fig. 3
figure 3

Schematic diagram of the contradiction between “urban and rural planning” and "land use planning" in X County, Guizhou. Source: Shanghai Fudan Planning and Architectual Design Institute, 2015

Full size image
Fig. 4
figure 4

Schematic diagram of the contradiction between “forest use planning” and “land use planning” in X County, Guizhou. Source: Shanghai Fudan Planning and Architectual Design Institute, 2015

Full size image
Fig. 5
figure 5

Schematic diagram of national key ecological functional zones. Source: National Leading Group for the Preparation of the Main Functional Area Planning, 2010

Full size image
Fig. 6
figure 6

Schematic diagram of national prohibited development zones. Source: National Leading Group for the Preparation of the Main Functional Area Planning, 2010

Full size image

3 Exploration and construction logic of the new planning system

3.1 Reform and experiment process of spatial planning since 2013

China’s central government has attached great importance to the role of spatial planning in national development, and been promoting institutional construction and reform in related fields for many years. The Central Government’s Working Meeting on Urbanization held in December 2013 proposed that, to "establish a spatial planning system, promote the institutional reform of planning, and accelerate planning legislation." The National New Style Urbanization Plan (2014–2020) released in 2014 clearly stated that the territory development and protection system should be established. In December 2014, the Central Economic Working Meeting pointed out that to improve the spatial planning system and promote the realization of "multi-plan integration" in cities and counties. In September 2015, the General Reform Plan for Promoting Ecological Progress of the CPC Central Committee put forward that "A spatial planning system should be constructed, with the main purpose of strengthening the spatial governance and optimizing the spatial structure, which is nationally unified and well connected and administrated in layers," so as to realize "one city or county, one plan with one blue-print." In October 2017, the report of the 19th National Congress of the CPC proposed to "establish territory development and protection system, improve supporting policies on major functional zones, and develop a nature reserves system composed mainly of national parks." As of February 2018, the Third Plenary Session of the 19th CPC Central Committee has made it further clearer to promote "multi-plan integration," and strengthen the guiding and restrictive role of spatial plan on various sector planning, and realize the organic integration of land use planning, urban and rural planning, etc.

In order to implement the instructions of the central government, relevant Ministries and Commissions have organized a series of practical explorations. For example, in 2014, the National Development and Reform Commission, the former Ministry of Land and Resources, the Ministry of Environmental Protection, and the Ministry of Housing and Urban–Rural Development jointly issued a circular to carry out "multi-plan integration" pilot program in 28 cities and counties; In 2017, the General Office of the CPC Central Committee and the General Office of the State Council issued the Pilot Program of Province-level Spatial Plan, which designated 9 provinces to carry out the pilot work.

After many years of exploration and deliberation, China’s central government has made the decision to start with institutional reform to resolve the multi-planning’ conflicts. The First Plenary Session of the 13th National People's Congress, held in March 2018, approved the State Council’s institutional reform plan, including to set up the new Ministry of Natural Resources. According to the publicized document, this new department of the State Council will undertake a variety of responsibilities, including the whole responsibilities of the former Ministry of Land and Resources, the making of Major Functional Zoning Plan of the National Development and Reform Commission, the urban and rural planning administration of the Ministry of Housing and Urban–Rural Development, the water resources investigation, entitlement and registration of the Ministry of Water Resources, the grassland resources investigation, entitlement and registration of the Ministry of Agriculture, the forest, wetland and other resources investigation, entitlement and registration of the State Forestry Bureau, the responsibilities of the former State Oceanic Bureau, the responsibilities of the former State Bureau of Surveying and Mapping, etc. It can be seen that the formulation and management functions of the major spatial planning both land territory and sea territory have been integrated and assigned to the Ministry of Natural Resources. So long as the institutional and mechanism dilemmas, that created the conflicts of the multi-planning, were eliminated, the establishment of a nationally unified, rational and efficient spatial planning system will be naturally put on the agenda.

3.2 Construction logic of the Spatial planning System

3.2.1 Administrative logic

For a country with a vast territory like China, the governmental structure of central authorities’ top-down administration and local multi-departmental governance is inevitable. The creation and development of China’s various spatial planning are necessary and reasonable, but the planning must be under a unified framework of territory development and protection.

Years of exploration and pilot projects have demonstrated that under current conditions, it is often difficult to achieve the expected results merely through making technical changes in the formulation of spatial planning; while the institutional optimization and the adjustment of their corresponding administrative systems would be more likely to generate the anticipated effects. If we probe in depth into the incoordination of departmental planning and management in the allocation of spatial resources, we can find that the most fundamental reason is the internal conflicts of the departmental policies, behind are different planning logics and the competition for "dominance" among the departments. These problems are manifested externally as each department formulating its own plan, with different planning scope, timing, technical standards and so on, that inevitably lead to dilemmas and conflicts.

If only working on the technical issues to pursue "multi-plan integration", there could be some superficial results rather than fundamental solution. Through the institutional reform, the central government has assigned all the responsibilities of spatial planning and management related to the protection and utilization of natural resources to the newly formed Ministry of Natural Resources, in the hope of effectively resolving the conflicts caused by institutional and mechanism factors in the past. On this basis, the construction of the Spatial planning System of "multi-plan integration" becomes a matter of course. It also reveals the administrative logic behind the construction of the new planning system as well as its term selection.

3.2.2 Technical logic

The formulation and evolution of various types of spatial planning in China correspond to specific goals and are all based on their sufficient technical rationalities; therefore, reforms and the construction of a new planning system should be a process of "sublation" rather than making an entire new one, that is, after the institutional reform and top-level design are completed, the reasonable connotations of the original planning at all levels and of all types shall be wisely retained and integrated into the new system, such as the general viewpoint and macro-control functions of the Major Functional Zoning; the functions of protecting land resources, rationally utilizing land, and effectively protecting cultivated land of Land Use Plan; the functions of coordinating the spatial layout of urban and rural areas and stipulating the development of human settlement of Urban and Rural planning, and its administrative procedures of land use planning permission and building planning permission; besides, all special and sector planning of land use relevant in fact also have their irreplaceable roles in their respective space-related fields. These are indispensable governance methods for territory development sand protection, and need to be integrated into the new framework to give full play of their functions. This can be regarded as the technical logic behind the construction of the new planning system.

The main body of the new planning making system is a "multi-plan integrated" Comprehensive Spatial Planning in five levels in corresponding to the central and local government divisions. At the municipal, county, town or township levels, there are two types of detailed planning makings, in order to implement the comprehensive plan of the same level and stipulate local land utilities. There are also many special or sector or planning to be contained in the new planning system. It can be said that this planning system not only features the "multi-plan integration," but also has openness to some extent. In practical term, the involving planning must be coordinated and unified in land use. The "instructions" clearly elaborates that the Comprehensive Spatial Planning should "strengthen the guiding and restrictive role on the Special and Sector Planning," and the Special or Sector Planning should "not violate the mandatory content in the Comprehensive Spatial Planning, and incorporate the main content into the Detailed Planning."

4 Legal construction of the new planning system and implementation strategies

4.1 Strengthen the legal construction in line with the new planning system

It is necessary to establish a spatial planning system and supervise its implementation based on the perception of rule of law while attaching importance to legal construction. As the reform and the construction of the new planning system still continue and inherit the previous planning system to a certain extent, the reasonable connotations of the previous planning of all types and at all levels should be retained. Therefore, the construction of the new planning system is inherently consistent with the legislative spirit of existing relevant laws such as the Urban and Rural Planning Law of the People’s Republic of China, the Land Administration Law of the People’s Republic of China and the basic requirements of the State Council’s policy documents. From the viewpoints of judicial logic and administrative rules, the formulation and supervision of the spatial planning system do have some legal sources. But in order to better implement the law-based governance strategy, the legal construction must also be coherent with major reforms, timely institutionalize the results of reform and innovation, and provide accurate and systematic legal norms and technical standards.

At the same time, we must also aware that new legislation will take some time. The formulation of new laws such as the Territory Development and Protection Law and the Spatial planning Law cannot be accomplished overnight. However, it is also unrealistic to wait until all legislation and technical standards are complete before starting the formulation, approval and implementation of the Spatial Planning. Therefore, there is a problem called "legal linkage during the transitional period," which requires the attention and proper handling of the People’s Congresses and Governments at all levels. As the "multi-plan integration" reform that integrates Land Use Plan, Urban and Rural planning, etc., the new Planning making practice will inevitably go beyond the content and provisions of the current laws and regulations. In this regard, the "Instruction" clearly requires "submitting for approval in accordance with the procedures first, and proceeding after obtaining authorization." This requirement embodies the spirit of law-based governance.

While the National People’s Congress and the central government make planning-related laws, administrative regulations and rules, local people’s congresses and governments with legislative authority can also take the initiative to formulate local planning regulations and make government decrees. Since the Spatial planning, corresponding Special or Sector Planning and Detailed Planning preparations involve various aspects of relationships and technical issues, the formulation of technical standards and specifications must also be advanced in a timely and orderly manner. Furthermore, according to the Standardization Law of the People’s Republic of China revised in 2017(China Standardization), apart from making National Standards by central authorities, the local governments, organizations, professional and social groups are all delegated rights to make planning related standards, that would help to fully meet the demands of the spatial planning in the new era.

4.2 The hierarchical and classified formulation and the transmission mechanism of the Spatial Planning

The construction and supervision of the spatial planning system are the specific measures to improve national governance. Therefore, the Comprehensive Spatial planning needs to have a transmission mechanism between the upper and lower levels, so that it can play a guiding and restrictive role on Special or Sector Planning, and finally be translated and elaborated into rules for land use control, to realize the goals of territorial functional zoning as well as urban and rural planning administration.

The new planning system highlights the different role setting and mechanism design of the Comprehensive Spatial planning at all levels, and emphasizes the principle of "top-down, and upper and lower-level coordination." According to the "Instructions", the National Comprehensive Spatial planning is the general outline for the protection and development of nation-wide territory, focusing on the strategic issues; Provincial Comprehensive Spatial planning implement National Comprehensive Spatial planning and guides the formulation of municipal and county-level Comprehensive Spatial planning, focusing on the coordination role; and the Comprehensive Spatial planning in municipal and county-levels are the detailed implementation of the planning requirements of the higher-level governments, and the specific arrangements for the development and protection of their administrative areas, focusing on implementation issues.

Viewing the general situation, the transmission mechanism between the upper and lower levels and the assigned focuses of the planning at different levels are undoubtedly necessary, and would be of help to overcome the blindness of the local governments in their planning making. In terms of current planning tasks at the local level, the provincial, municipal and county levels will formulate their Comprehensive Spatial planning up to 2035 and looking forward to 2050, in a top-down manner. This requires lower-level authorities to follow and elaborate the higher-level planning requirements, at the same time, carry out various researches concerning local conditions, in order to make "strategic, basic and restrictive" arrangements for their administrative areas of different levels. The local Comprehensive Spatial planning’ making should give feedback to the upper-level planning making and provide terms to the lower levels’ planning making, as well as to exercise guiding and constraining functions on special and sector planning processes.

The new planning system still follows the hierarchical system with division of administrative powers in formulation and approval procedures, but pays more attention to "implementation and supervision." It emphasizes the compliance of the lower-level planning with the upper-level planning, and of the Special or Sector Planning and Detailed Planning with the Comprehensive Spatial plannings. At the same time, feedback should be given by the lower-level planning to the upper-level planning, and by the special or sector planning and detailed planning to the general planning. And reasonable interaction and corresponding confirming mechanisms are also required. Spatial planning and the corresponding supervision and implementation are a systematic project, the systematic approaches are the premise that will ensure the smooth and effective operation of the system.

4.3 The strategic guidance and baseline control roles of the municipal and county-level Comprehensive Spatial planning

Compared with the national and provincial-level Comprehensive Spatial planning, the municipal and county-level Comprehensive Spatial planning should lay particular emphasis on implementation issues. It is also true, from international and domestic experience, the formulation of municipal and county-level Comprehensive Spatial planning will definitely involve the concerns of the regional and socio-economic development issues, rather than to be limited on land use allocation and control matters.

For example, regarding the Beijing’s new Master Planning, General Secretary Xi Jinping once clearly requested that Beijing’s urban planning should have in-depth thinking on what kind of Capital City to build and how to build it, grasp the strategic positioning, spatial pattern, and element configuration, persist in urban and rural overall development, and implement "multi-plan integration," to form one plan and one blueprint. Regarding the Shanghai’ Master Planning, the State Council pointed out in its ratification document: under the guidance of the Shanghai Master Planning, efforts should be made to enhance the city’s functions, shape its distinctive features, improve environmental quality, optimize urban management and services, and strive to build Shanghai into an admirable city of innovation, humanity and sustainability, an excellent global city, and a modern socialist international metropolis with world influence. It can be seen that a municipal spatial comprehensive or master plan is a strategic plan that combines economic and social development goals with spatial arrangements, and its formulation and implementation should be the joint task of all competent departments under the leadership of the municipal government. The Comprehensive Spatial planning at the national, provincial, municipal and county levels, with the planning period to 2035 and prospects to 2050, is both basic and strategic. It should be a joint master plan that guiding the making of five-year local "economic and social development plan" and the five-year "urban and rural development plan" and other action planning.

In short, taking into account the function of municipal and county-level Comprehensive Spatial Planning, as an integration of former Major Functional Zoning Plan, Land Use Plan, Urban and Rural Planning and other spatial and sector planning, it should continue and further exert its original roles of "strategic guidance" and "baseline control" (Dong & Zhang, 2018). The content of its formulation should cover the aspects of economy, society, ecology, and social service and management. Planners should not limit its content to spatial matter itself, and should never artificially create new conflicts between development, spatial and other planning.

4.4 Formulation method of detailed planning under the spatial planning system

In the formulation of municipal and county-level Comprehensive Spatial planning, "multi-plan integration" must be realized as the full coverage of urban and rural areas in the functional and policy zoning maps of a governmental spatial planning; its vertical transmission and elaboration should also achieve full coverage of urban and rural areas in a city or county area. Therefore, the Detailed Plan should be adopted at the municipal, county and below levels.

Detailed Plan is an implementation arrangement for the use of specific land plots. It is the legal basis for the administration of spatial development and protection, including the implementation of land use control, the grant of building permits for urban and rural construction projects, and carrying out various constructions. Specifically, it is divided into detailed plan within the urban development boundary and detailed plan for rural areas outside the urban development boundary. Through two types of Detailed Planning, full coverage of urban and rural areas will be achieved. The Detailed Plan under the spatial planning formulation system seems to be the same as the current "Regulatory Plan." But under the new system, detailed planning making needs to be innovated and improved on the basis of the past experience and new demands.

According to the observation of Zoning By-Law and Local Planning in North America and European countries, the planning formulation at the development control level generally covers the entire administrative area. There is great flexibility in the setting of the scale of the planning maps, land use classification and other planning control elements to suit different planning objects such as densely constructed areas and agricultural areas. In contrast, the formulation of China’s previous "Regulatory Plan" basically followed the same pattern, which ignored the diverse characteristics of spatial objects. Under the new "multi-plan integration" planning system, the formulation and implementation of the Detailed Plan should be unified for urban and rural areas, with classified guidance provided. Unified Detailed Plan should be formulated for urban construction areas and rural areas, but differentiated formulation methods and technical standards should be developed, so the drawing scale, land use classification, setting of control elements, etc. could be different according to the real needs.

4.5 The division of planning administration and the innovation of planning documentation

In order to improve the efficiency of planning administration, it is necessary to reasonably divide the administrative responsibilities of planning. There have been many discussions on this subject in the planning academic circle. It is generally believed that a higher-level government should mainly to pay attention to the functional orientation, development scale, environment and resources, important historical and cultural heritage, regional infrastructure, ecological protection and other planning content of lower-level cities and counties that involves national and regional interests. The layout of urban and rural land use, public service facilities, commercial service facilities, road transportation facilities, municipal public facilities, green space and squares, urban landscape construction, etc. could be classified as affairs of local governments (Zhao & Hao, 2012).

Taking the lessons of previous practice, the principle of division of planning powers in the Spatial planning System has set up. The approval, and supervision will be that "the higher-level governments only verify their concerned contents of lower-level governments’ planning". And based on the principle of "The government approving a plan shall also be responsible for the supervision," a review and record system for the Spatial Planning at different levels will be established. In order to implement this reform, the content of planning formulation, the documentation of written planning, and the method of submission for approval must also be adjusted or innovated.

The innovation of the planning document system can not only better fit the division of administrative powers, but also help highlight the strategic roles and public policy attributes of the governmental Comprehensive Spatial planning. Planning document must be comprehensible and readable to the public. To this end, the previous boring panning texts and maps that focused on "technical" clauses and drawings must be changed into public-friendly booklets, including the use of illustrated typesetting and well-founded explanations.

In this regard, the new Shanghai Master Plan is a good example worthy of reference. Shanghai has adopted the "1 + 3" documentation, of which "1" is the general report of "Shanghai Master Plan (2017–2035)," a framework document guiding the urban development at a strategic level. The report is pretty readable, organized in the form of pictures and texts; the content is divided into six parts: 1. overview; 2. development goal (striving for the excellent global city); 3. development pattern; 4. spatial layout; 5. development strategy; and 6. implementation measures. "3" is " district planning guidelines," "sector planning outline" and "action planning outline," as attachments to "1" (Zhang, Wang, Wang, Chen, & Liu, 2017). In general, "1" is related to the responsibility of the central government. After the plan is submitted to and approved by the State Council, the Shanghai government is responsible for implementation and the central government for supervision. The content of "3" only involves local affairs, and only a framework arrangement has been made in the comprehensive planning stage, which serves only as a guide and outline. In accordance with the Master Plan approved by the State Council, the Shanghai Municipal Government shall organize the flowing work, including the formulation and approval of district-level Master Planning, Special and Sector planning and various Action and major Construction Planning.

It needs to be pointed out that China is a unified central country. According to the Constitution, "Local people’s governments at various levels are responsible and report on their work to people’s congresses at the corresponding levels, and are responsible and report on their work to the state administrative organs at the next higher level. Local people’s governments at various levels throughout the country are state administrative organs under the unified leadership of the State Council and are subordinate to it" (Article 110 of the Constitution of the People’s Republic of China). Therefore, the division of planning administrative powers is not absolute. Even if it is a "local responsibility," the higher-level governments and the central government can still exercise supervisory powers and hold the local government accountable.

5 Conclusion

Spatial governance is an essential part of national governance. The major decision made by the CPC Central Committee and the State Council to establish a Spatial planning System and supervise its implementation is the specific measures to improve China’s governance system and governance capabilities, which is also a response to the requirement of the ecological civilization in the new era.

Research has revealed that all spatial relevant planning were created for some specific reasons and all have their specific evolution courses; behind the establishment of a unified Spatial planning System, there are administrative and technical logics. As far as the professional practice of planning is concerned, both the planning formulation system and the planning supervision and implementation mechanism must conform to the new development concept so as to promote the modernization of national governance.

From the relationship between professional practice of planning and the development of planning disciplines, as explained by (Luo & Song, 2018) in their paper, "The emergence of new planning with different functions is not only a response to problems and challenges, but also the continuous enrichment and development of the practice and knowledge system of urban planning. The enrichment and development may manifest as a relatively independent type of planning for a period of time. However, with the exchange of knowledge, they will eventually be integrated into a more comprehensive and powerful knowledge system." Corresponding to this "knowledge system" are many disciplines of higher education, and the subject of urban and rural planning is one of the key disciplines.

With the continuous development of China’s economy, society and urbanization, and the constant changes in natural resources and environmental conditions, the spatial planning system, the professional practice, and the disciplinary connotation behind will also inevitably change. As far as China’s urban planning is concerned, space and scope have been continuously expanded over the years: from planning design to permit management; from urban planning to urban system planning; from physical planning and design to economic and social development strategies; from urban planning to urban and rural planning and "city-region" planning. It can be said that urban planning has evolved into comprehensive planning, and needs to deal with issues at multiple levels and of various natures such as "urban area" and "region," "city" and "rural," "development" and "protection," etc. Therefore, the intersection and integration of the urban planning profession and other planning professions become inevitable, and the urban planning discipline is constantly developing and changing because of the continuous absorption of knowledge and methods from other disciplines. However, the discipline of urban and rural planning still needs to define the boundaries of its own field as it cannot expand indefinitely and cover everything.

Besides, there are also aspects that remain unchanged during the tremendous changes, such as the original aspiration of planning. Original aspirations should be maintained and new advancements should also be made, whether it is Ebenezer Howard’s "Garden City" vision, the concepts advocated by the "Garden City and Town Planning Association," or the public intervention theory that emerged in the desire of overcoming the defects of the market mechanism, or the development concept of protecting the ecological environment, historical culture, and pursuing efficiency and fairness of resource and welfare allocation.