【目的】 低碳发展与生态环境优化是风景园林学科的重大使命。中国近年提出了若干低碳社区建设举措，但尚未形成可持续的中微观实践体系，尤其在设计引导反馈与项目转化方面存在不足。探讨国外相对成熟的政策实施路径，对中国低碳社区实践的可持续发展有积极意义。【方法】 建立“制度-策略-工具”分析框架，开展实施路径机制研究，解析国内外使用较为广泛的低碳社区政策，并选取影响广泛的美国LEED-ND与法国ÉcoQuartier政策进行深入对比。【结果】 不同制度孕育特定策略，相应构建实施工具；制度、策略、工具三要素的正向协同效应，形成长期有效的主体互动过程，最终对低碳发展在空间维度的实现提供支撑。【结论】 结合中国制度特点与建设现实，低碳社区政策实施中可结合标准化评价路径的量化指标与适应性治理路径的弹性互动特点，引入市场力量形成多元主体共建机制，通过技术交流与过程辅导强化设计互馈，构建促进源头降碳的空间与生态景观设计工具，推动中国低碳社区政策的空间效益与推广实施。

[Objective] The research on carbon neutrality, in an ecological – environmental perspective, is a major mission of the landscape architecture discipline. In the global pursuit of low-carbon urban development, communities play a pivotal role in advancing low-carbon initiatives at the meso – micro scale. Since 2015, China has initiated a series of pilot projects to establish low-carbon communities following the issuance of national guidelines. However, the current policy implementation paths in China are not yet mature, primarily relying on the organization of pilot programs in various regions, which poses certain challenges for the promotion and scaling-up of low-carbon community development. Relevant policies rely predominantly on operational indicators for evaluation, offering inadequate feedback to guide implementation and design. This research aims to explore effective implementation paths for low-carbon community policies to promote sustainable development and broader dissemination of low-carbon communities in China.

[Methods] This research employs an analytical framework of “institution – strategy – tool” (IST) to dissect policies related to low-carbon community development. Institutions, strategies, and tools are the three pivotal elements of an implementation pathway mechanism; the collaborative mode that these three elements jointly shape and the operational process thereof constitute the implementation paths discussed in this research. The research begins with a comparative overview of widely-used low-carbon community policies at home and abroad, highlighting their institutional backgrounds, strategic focuses, and implementation tools. Subsequently, the research conducts an in-depth analysis of two representative policies: LEED 4.0 Neighborhood Development (LEED-ND), a market-driven, standardized evaluation system developed by the U.S. Green Building Council (USGBC), and ÉcoQuartier, a government-led, adaptive governance initiative launched by the French Ministry of Ecology. Besides analyzing these two representative policies through the IST framework, the research compares these international models with China’s current practices, identifying gaps and opportunities for improvement in the Chinese context.

[Results] The results demonstrate that different institutional contexts give rise to distinct strategies, which in turn shape corresponding implementation tools and thereby generate divergent implementation paths. The positive synergy among their three core elements — institutions, strategies, and tools — is essential for the effective and efficient implementation of those policies. Strategies and tools are constructed under the foundational institutional conditions. The three elements then continuously influence and iteratively refine each other, progressively evolving into a well-integrated, mutually matched, and enduringly dynamic system for sustainable development. This sustained interaction fosters a long-term, effective process of stakeholder collaboration, enabling the transition of low-carbon community policies into its spatial interpretation. This can trigger a continuously accumulating positive spatial feedback loop.

[Conclusion] Both the indicator-based, highly quantified standardized evaluation pathways and the guidance-oriented, customized adaptive governance pathways have successfully engaged diverse social stakeholders, providing effective guidance or feedback mechanisms for low-carbon community development and forming a robust foundation for practical implementation and scaling-up. Therefore, to achieve the spatial grounding and positive accumulation of low-carbon development, the three elements — institutions, strategies, and tools — ought to be mutually aligned, forging a long-term, effective collaborative relationship among the stakeholders involved. Based on China’s current low-carbon community development, this research proposes three key optimization directions to enhance implementation effectiveness. This research argues that spatial – ecological landscape design tools that assist carbon reduction should be developed, thereby enhancing the spatial benefits and wider dissemination of China’s low-carbon community policies. First, to implement low-carbon community policies, market-based stakeholders should be incorporated to create a multi-stakeholder governance mechanism. Public funds should be strategically leveraged to attract social capitals, fostering a multi-stakeholder collaborative development mechanism. Unlike international practices, China’s current low-carbon community development relies heavily on direct government investment, resulting in significant financial burdens and limited scalability. To address this, mechanisms such as performance-based rewards and reputation marketing campaigns should be introduced to incentivize developers, businesses, and residents to actively participate in low-carbon projects. By ensuring all stakeholders perceive tangible benefits, broader support can be mobilized to collaboratively create sustainable communities. Second, technical exchanges and process-oriented coaching should be used to intensify design interactions. The fundamental purpose of developing a comprehensive indicator system is to achieve real carbon emission reductions in line with China’s “carbon peaking and carbon neutrality goals”. Technical exchanges and ongoing process support allow proven technical methods from pilot projects to be closely integrated with current project conditions, while progressively aligning low-carbon management practices and spatial design optimization requirements with each project’s renewal objectives. Only in this way can relatively abundant government funds be directed toward the specific and realistic needs of each project. Finally, policies should incorporate design strategies for spatial and ecological landscape optimization and tools tailored specifically to the community level, so as to ensure effective project implementation. International best practices demonstrate that spatial adjustments and optimizations can simultaneously enhance quality of life and reduce resource consumption, achieving low-carbon goals at a lower cost. Integrating spatial design elements into China’s low-carbon community policies, alongside existing technological carbon-reduction measures, can enable a more comprehensive and coordinated implementation of low-carbon strategies at the community level. This approach not only improves resource efficiency but also creates more livable and sustainable environments. This will align with global best practices while addressing the unique challenges and opportunities within China’s institutional and developmental context, ultimately contributing to the China’s broader climate goals.

① 地方标准包括：北京市（《低碳社区评价技术导则》，2016年）、深圳市（《低碳社区评价指南》，2018年；《近零碳社区建设指南》，2024年）、广东省（《零碳社区建设与评价指南》，2022年）等。团体标准包括：《绿色低碳社区建设及评价技术指南》（中国国际科技促进会，2023年）、《零碳社区测评标准（试行）》（中国建筑节能协会，2024年）等。

② 因中国国家标准《低碳社区建设指南》未明确为各指标维度赋以权重，故本研究选取北京地方标准《低碳社区评价技术导则》（DB11/T 1371—2016）、深圳市《低碳社区评价指南》（SZDB/Z 310—2018）明确发布权重赋值的标准为代表参与横向比较。

③ 2019年，LEED推出了并行的测试版本政策LEED-City and Communities“城市与社区”，继续保留了精确量化、标准化评分的体系，并试图构建一个更为广泛综合的评价系统，将评价对象由邻里社区扩大至城市及社区，进一步提升了便于通过标准化数值进行效能量化管理的资源与能源管理等内容及原体系中的绿色基础设施部分。但是该系统自发布以来仍处于测试阶段，且并未替换LEED-ND系统，认证项目样品数量也小于后者，因此本研究仍然以LEED-ND作为核心。

④ ÉcoQuartier政策中，如项目申请主体为非地方政府机构，项目所在地的地方政府机构应列入项目申请的合作方。

⑤ 危机环境交通规划研究与技术中心（法文：Centre d'études et d'expertise sur les risques, l'environnement, la mobilité et l'aménagement）是法国政府生态部下属的公共科学技术研究机构，其主要工作关注九大领域：地域治理与发展、城市与都市战略、能源与气候转型、环境与自然资源、危机防护、舒适性与干扰治理、交通出行、交通基础设施、居住及建筑。

图2、4、5、6分别根据参考文献[12][22][24][26][27]翻译、改绘；图3引自参考文献[22]；表2、3、4分别根据参考文献[12][19][23]绘制；其余图表均由作者绘制。